('lass / D^ltT 
 
 PlJKSENTlil) m 
 
 
/ 
 
 t^7 
 / u 
 
 PETER RAMUS 
 
 AND THK 
 
 EDUCATIONAL REFORMATION OF THE 
 SIXTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 / 
 
 v**^^ 
 ^'^ 
 
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO 
 DALIES • SAN FRANCISCO 
 
 MACMILLAN & CO., Limited 
 
 LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA 
 MELBOURNE 
 
 THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd. 
 
 TORONTO 
 
PETER RAMUS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 EDUCATIONAL REFORMATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SIXTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK PIERREPONT GRAVES 
 
 A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the 
 
 requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 
 
 in the Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia 
 
 University 
 
 NEW YORK 
 1912 
 

 Copyright, 1912, 
 By the MACMILLAN COMPANY. 
 
 Set up and electrotyped. Published September, 191a. 
 
 Gift 
 *5*« Uaiversit 
 25 MOV ' 
 

 F 
 u 
 
 Li 
 
 TO 
 
 PAUL MONROE 
 
 WHO HAS GIVEN TO THE HISTORY OF EDUCATION 
 
 ITS PRESENT HIGH STATUS 
 
 IN AMERICA 
 
PREFACE 
 
 It is difficult to understand why Ramus has 
 been so much neglected by writers upon the six- 
 teenth century. He was probably the foremost 
 French philosopher of his century, and he stands 
 well among the great educators, effective orators, 
 and lofty characters of the world's history. In 
 many respects he seems a striking forerunner of 
 modern times. Alcuin, Abelard, Petrarch, Valla,^ 
 Erasmus, Luther, Ramus, and Descartes are mile- 
 stones that mark the pathway of progress from 
 medievalism. Yet in few general histories do 
 the life and work of this remarkable reformer 
 figure in any detail. In treatises written in Eng- 
 lish he is barely mentioned, and while there have 
 been for half a century some extended accounts 
 of his career by French writers, and of late Ger- 
 man scholars have been making careful contribu- 
 tions to elucidate the various phases of his work, 
 there scarcely exists anywhere a complete account 
 of his achievements that includes an analysis of 
 his works. 
 
Vlll PREFACE 
 
 Yet many pages are devoted in histories of 
 education to such contemporaries of Ramus in 
 France as Rabelais and Montaigne. While these 
 nien were of great importance in the develop- 
 ment of literature and educational theory, they 
 seem to have had comparatively little effect upon 
 the schools or the movements of the times. 
 Ramus, on the other hand, was a practical re- 
 former, a writer of textbooks, the founder of 
 a new and influential point of view in subject 
 matter and method, a popular and successful 
 teacher, and an active correspondent and per- 
 sonal acquaintance of the educational leaders of 
 his day in all countries. No man more fully 
 embodies the spirit of this age of reconstruction, 
 the storm and stress period of the sixteenth 
 century. Aside from the account of his own 
 contributions to education and theology, the life 
 and work of Ramus are well worth studying for 
 the light they shed upon such a critical epoch in 
 history. 
 
 In presenting this account of Ramus, I wish to 
 tender my thanks to Professor Frederic Ernest 
 Farrington, who first called my attention to the 
 importance of the subject, to Professor Paul Mon- 
 roe, who has critically reviewed the whole work, 
 and to Professor David E. Smith, who furnished 
 me with written suggestions concerning my treat- 
 
PREFACE IX 
 
 ment of Ramus as a mathematician, I am also 
 indebted to Miss Betty Joffe, and to my wife, 
 Helen Wadsworth Graves, for several changes in 
 the manuscript and assistance in carrying the 
 book through press. 
 
 The engraved likeness of Ramus, which forms 
 the frontispiece of this book, I also owe to Pro- 
 fessor Farrington, who souglit it out for me, and 
 to the distinguished M. Chatelain, Conservateur 
 de la Bibliotlieque de la Sor bonne, who photo- 
 graphed the picture for me from the Bibliotlieque 
 de Boissard and developed the plate with his own 
 
 hands. 
 
 F. P. G. 
 
 August, 191 2. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER PAGE 
 
 I. The Times of Ramus i 
 
 II. The Breach with Aristotle . . . -19 
 
 III. Professor in the Royal College ... 48 
 
 IV. Conversion, Persecution, and Death . . .71 
 
 V. General Principles and the Organization of 
 Education 
 
 VI. The Content and Method of the Trivium 
 
 VII. Content and Method of the Quadrivium . 
 
 VIII. Higher and Professional Studies 
 IX. Value, Spread, and Influence of Ramism . 
 
 Sources, Primary and Secondary .... 
 
 108 
 120 
 160 
 
 173 
 204 
 219 
 
PETER RAMUS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 The Times of Ramus 
 
 Before undertaking a sketch of the Hfe and 
 achievements of Ramus, it will be well to gain some 
 notion of his social and political setting. To under- 
 stand the work of this leader, we must make a rapid 
 survey of the forces that were struggling for suprem- 
 acy during the sixteenth century in northern Europe, 
 especially in France. This period, in the first place, 
 witnessed the development of the Renaissance and 
 of humanism in the countries of the north. Here the 
 Greek and Latin literature came to enrich the medie- 
 val ideals and the course in the seven hberal arts. 
 While the preceding century had been marked by 
 the growth of the movement in Italy, this vitalizing 
 development of the Italian peninsula was now senes- 
 cent and was degenerating into a mere ' Ciceronian ' 
 formalism. The introduction of printing, however, 
 had given the movement a wider field of action, 
 
2 PETER RAMUS 
 
 and the renewed spirit of independence and criticism 
 could not be confined to a single country. The 
 Renaissance and the classic literatures had leaped 
 the Alps and had rapidly made their way northward. 
 Toward the close of the fifteenth century the human- 
 ists outside of Italy became very numerous, and the 
 movement came to its height in the northern lands 
 during the sixteenth century. 
 
 Probably the earliest appearance of humanism 
 beyond the peninsula was in the education furnished 
 through the religious order of the Hieronymians. 
 This brotherhood had been founded in Holland for 
 the purpose of instructing the poor, in religion and 
 the rudiments, but during the latter half of the 
 fifteenth century the brethren added humanistic 
 elements to their course and soon had a chain of 
 schools extending through the Netherlands, Ger- 
 many, and France.^ Connected with this humanistic 
 development, either as teacher or pupil, were such 
 men as Agricola (1443-1485), Reuchlin (1455-1522), 
 and that great leader of northern humanism, Erasmus 
 (1467-1536). The Hieronymian schools had a pro- 
 
 ^ It is still somewhat mooted whether these Brethren of the 
 Common Lot actually maintained schools of their own, or fur- 
 nished ' colleges ' or dormitories near schools already established. 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS 3 
 
 found effect upon education and tended to introduce 
 the classics into the universities and other educational 
 institutions. But there were other schools that 
 were even more directly the outgrowth of humanism, 
 chief among which were the Gymnasien and the 
 Jesuit 'colleges.' The Gymnasien were given their 
 greatest impulse and more definite form by Sturm 
 during the generation succeeding the foundation 
 of his school and university at Strassburg (1538).^ 
 The gymnasial course of ten years,^ which consisted 
 largely of Latin and Greek, proved successful and 
 spread in all directions. Just before the middle of 
 the century the Jesuit 'colleges,' also with a purely 
 humanistic curriculum, were started by Loyola, 
 and sprang up rapidly throughout Europe. 
 
 The universities, though narrow, conservative, and 
 generally reluctant to admit the classics, were like- 
 wise feeling the effects of the movement. By 1470, 
 a professorship of Greek was established at the 
 University of Paris, and while the new learning met 
 
 ^ The great repute of this school at Strassburg probably stamped 
 the name Gymnasium upon the German language as the technical 
 term for the great secondary schools in which the classics have 
 ever since formed the basis of the course. 
 
 2 For the course in full, see Barnard's German Teachers and 
 Educators, pp. 196-208. 
 
4 PETER RAMUS 
 
 with formidable opposition, it found an influential 
 patron in the king, Francis I {r. 151 5-1 547). He 
 protected the humanistic scholars and educators, 
 and, urged by Budaeus (1468-1540) and other 
 humanists, founded in 1530 the College of France, or 
 College Royal, with its chairs of Greek and Latin, as 
 a protest against the scholastic and dogmatic course 
 of the university. It was in this college that Ramus, 
 who had shown himself an ardent humanist, was 
 eventually appointed to a professorship. Humanism 
 also spread in the German universities. By the 
 early part of the sixteenth century, the course at 
 Erfurt, Leipzig, Heidelberg, and Tiibingen came 
 to include the classics, and a number of new human- 
 istic universities, such as Wittenberg, Konigsberg, 
 and Jena, were started about the middle of the cen- 
 tury. 
 
 Similarly profound changes were being effected 
 in England. A revival of the classics, which had 
 been gradually gaining strength, began in earnest 
 at Oxford toward the end of the fifteenth century 
 with the work of Grocyn and Linacre, and at Cam- 
 bridge in the first half of the sixteenth with the 
 lectures of Erasmus, Cheke, and Ascham. More 
 and Wolse^^ also lent substantial aid to the movement 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS 5 
 
 through their influence at court. Finally, by Colet's 
 foundation of his humanistic school at St. Paul's in 
 1509, a successful example was set for secondary 
 education, which resulted in the Latin * grammar' 
 school becoming the typical secondary organization 
 in England. 
 
 But the character and the effects of the Renais- 
 sance and humanism in the north differed greatly 
 from those in Italy. The people of the north were 
 of a deeper and more serious temperament than the 
 brilliant and mercurial Italians. With them the 
 Renaissance led less to a desire for personal develop- 
 ment, self-realization, and individual achievement, 
 and took on a more social and moral color. The 
 prime purpose of humanism in the north became 
 the improvement of society, morally and religiously, 
 and much less attention was paid to the physical, 
 intellectual, and aesthetic elements in education. 
 The classical revival here pointed the way to obtain- 
 ing a new and more exalted meaning from the Scrip- 
 tures. Through the revival of Greek, northern 
 scholars sought to get away from the ecclesiastical 
 doctrines and traditions, and turned back to the 
 essence of Christianity by studying the New Testa- 
 ment in the original. This suggested a similar in- 
 
6 PETER RAMUS 
 
 sight into the Old Testament, and an interest in 
 Hebrew was thereby aroused. To most people 
 in the North a renewed study of the Bible became 
 as important a feature of humanism as an apprecia- 
 tion of the classics, and the purer religious and theo- 
 logical conception that resulted mark the Reforma- 
 tion as an accompaniment of the Renaissance. In 
 consequence, most of the humanists of the north 
 were also religious reformers, and in Germany, the 
 Netherlands, France, and England humanism passed 
 over into the Reformation. Erasmus differed from 
 Luther only in believing that education would 
 eventually effect the desired changes. So Melanch- 
 thon is ranked as a reformer, but he was fully as 
 much a humanist, while the great humanistic educa- 
 tor, Sturm, was in hearty sympathy with the Ref- 
 ormation. Lefevre and others gave the first im- 
 pulse to French Protestantism through a new trans- 
 lation of the Bible. Colet endeavored to dethrone 
 dogma and tradition by a better interpretation of 
 the Pauline Epistles and the pseudo-Dionysius. 
 And it was evidently his humanistic bent and insight 
 that caused Ramus, the educational reformer under 
 consideration, to cast in his lot with the oppressed 
 religious reformers. 
 
THE TIMES OE RAMUS 7 
 
 Undoubtedly it was the support lent the cause of 
 religious and theological reform by the awakened 
 social and moral, as well as intellectual, attitude of 
 humanism in the north, that enabled the series 
 of revolts which arose against papal authority 
 in the sixteenth century, to be more successful 
 than were those of the Albigenses and Waldenses, 
 Wyclif and Huss, in the preceding centuries. Luther's 
 revolt (15 1 7-152 1) was primarily the result of his 
 spiritual struggles and of his intellectual desire to 
 formulate a better doctrine, but his persistence and 
 success must be attributed to the sympathetic 
 attitude of the times. Zwingli actually got his 
 start (15 1 9) by learning from Erasmus and other 
 humanists how little basis there was in the Bible for 
 the traditional theology and ritual. Calvin (1535) 
 was among those who, after the work of Lefevre, 
 were led to reject the traditional doctrines and forms 
 through the influence of northern humanism and 
 the study of the Greek Testament. While the im- 
 mediate cause of Henry VIII 's revolt (1533) in 
 England was personal advantage and statecraft, 
 it was somewhat the result of the northern Renais- 
 sance, for without the aid of the independence and 
 individualism that had been growing up in England 
 
8 PETER RAMUS 
 
 as the concomitant of humanism, even the king could 
 not have successfully contested with the pope. 
 Hence there is a close connection in the northern 
 countries between the Renaissance and the Reforma- 
 tion ; they are, in truth, but different phases of the 
 same movement. 
 
 Such was the general intellectual and religious 
 situation of the sixteenth century. The more 
 specific political and social conditions and problems 
 in the different countries during this period are 
 equally important and interesting in the history of 
 civilization. This century marked the climax of 
 the Hapsburg power. In 1516 Charles V inherited 
 from four grandparents, each a sovereign in his own 
 right, dominion over Burgundy, the Netherlands, 
 Spain and the Spanish possessions in America, por- 
 tions of Italy, and the Austrian territories, and three 
 years later he was, in keeping with precedent, elected 
 emperor. But his imperial control was mostly 
 nominal. As an inheritance from feudalism, Ger- 
 many still consisted of two or three hundred states, 
 differing greatly from one another in size and 
 character, but all independent, and it was not in- 
 tended that the emperor, who was elected on each 
 occasion by a mixed commission of seven powerful 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS 9 
 
 princes, should be, outside his own realm, much 
 more than a figurehead. This condition of things 
 accounts for the inability of the Diet of Worms (1521) 
 and the succeeding imperial legislation to enforce 
 its decrees against Luther, and for the eventual 
 acceptance by the emperor of the Peace of Augsburg 
 (1555)? whereby each German state was allowed 
 to choose for itself between the Lutheran and 
 Catholic confessions. The next year the gouty 
 Charles laid down the cares of government, after 
 transferring his eastern possessions to his brother, 
 Ferdinand, and the western to his son, Philip IL 
 By this time the Council of Trent (i 545-1546 and 
 1 562-1563) and the rise and spread of the Jesuits 
 were bringing the religious controversy in Europe to 
 an acute stage, and Philip soon showed himself the 
 most ardent supporter of the pope and the persecutor 
 of all Protestants, especially in his Netherland 
 dominions. Meanwhile the revolt of the English 
 church had taken place during the reigns of Henry 
 VIII (1533-1547) and Edward VI (1547-1553), and 
 after a brief return to CathoHcism and Protestant 
 persecution under Mary (1553-1558), Elizabeth 
 greatly widened the breach (1558). Before the end 
 of the century she had assisted the Protestant 
 
lO PETER RAMUS 
 
 Netherlands, frustrated the attempt of PhiHp to 
 land troops in Ireland, and beaten off the Spanish 
 Armada (1588). 
 
 But of more direct importance to our understand- 
 ing of the career of Ramus (1515-1572) is the situation 
 in France itself. Here the religious controversy took 
 the form of civil wars between the Catholics and 
 Protestants, which lasted beyond the lifetime of our 
 reformer. The Protestants were protected by Mar- 
 garet of Navarre, sister of Francis I {r. 1515-1547), 
 but the king himself was stirred up by the theologians 
 of the University of Paris against the reformers. He 
 consented to the burning of heretics in 1535, which 
 led to the flight of Calvin to Basel. Here the 
 great reformer prepared the defense of his belief 
 in The Institutes of Christianity (1536). Shortly 
 after this he was called to the spiritual and civic 
 directorship of Geneva, which, except for a brief 
 interval, he held until his death (1564). His 
 successor at Geneva, Theodore Beza (151 9- 160 5), had 
 displayed great ability in the defense of Protestantism 
 at the Colloquy of Poissy (1561), and both on this 
 occasion and later was destined to play an important 
 part in the life of Ramus. Francis I meanwhile 
 grew more and more intolerant, and two years be- 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS II 
 
 fore his death had some three thousand Waldenses 
 massacred. His successor, Henry II (;'. 1 547-1 559), 
 also pledged himself to exterminate the Protestants, 
 but did not hesitate to ally himself with their co- 
 religionists in Germany when he wished to wrest 
 away part of the dominions of Charles V. Under the 
 short reign of the weak sons of Henry — Francis II, 
 Charles IX, and Henry III — there was an era of 
 almost constant civil war. Francis II (r. 1 559-1 560) 
 had married Mary, Queen of Scots, During his 
 brief occupancy of the throne, the government was 
 controlled by his wife's two powerful French uncles, 
 Francis, Duke of Guise, and Charles, Cardinal of 
 Lorraine, and even after the death of the young 
 king, the Guises never surrendered their influence. 
 The Guise cardinal is most prominent in the life 
 of Ramus, first as his patron and protector, and, 
 after the reformer's conversion to Calvinism (1561), 
 as his inveterate enemy. During the reign of Charles 
 IX (r. 1 560-1 574), his mother, Catherine de' Medici, 
 was virtually the sovereign, and affairs were further 
 complicated by the union of the Bourbons, or younger 
 branch of the reigning family, with the ' Huguenots,' as 
 the French Calvinists had come to be known. Many 
 of the Huguenots belonged to noble families, as in 
 
ir PETER RAMUS 
 
 the case of the Prince of Conde, who represented a 
 collateral branch of the Bourbons, and of Admiral 
 ("oligny, whose father had been a marshal of France 
 and his mother a Montmorency. These leaders were 
 generally 'Huguenots of state,' and their connection 
 with Protestantism came to confuse politics with 
 religion, and often proved embarrassing to such 
 'Huguenots of religion' as Ramus. For a time it 
 seemed as if the Huguenot party might control the 
 government, and the queen-mother was forced to 
 issue the Edict of Toleration (January 17, 1562), 
 permitting the Protestants to assemble for worship 
 during the day in all places outside the towns. 
 
 But the Guises had no intention of allowing 
 matters to rest. In the same year, by a brutal 
 massacre of one thousand Huguenots, who were wor- 
 shiping at Vassy, they precipitated the first of the 
 civil wars. During the life of Ramus there were 
 three such outbreaks (1562, 1567, and 1572), which 
 were characterized by the utmost savagery upon 
 both sides. In the first two conflicts Ramus and 
 other Protestants were driven into temporary exile. 
 In 1570 peace was declared, and the Calvinists were 
 allowed, for their protection, to fortify certain towns, 
 such as La Rochelle, Montauban, and Nimes. 
 
THE TIMES OF KAMUS 1 5 
 
 Coligiiy became a sort of privy councilor Lo tiie king 
 and queen-mother, but the Guises soon led the 
 queen to believe that this Huguenot leader was 
 plotting against her, and they eventually brought 
 about the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day 
 (August 23-25, 1572). In the course of this butchery 
 Coligny was slain, Conde barely escaped by recanting, 
 and Ramus suffered a most horrible death. After 
 the massacre, civil war again broke out, and the 
 Guises, with the aid of the pope and the Parlement 
 of Paris, formed the Holy League for their own inter- 
 ests and the crushing of Protestantism, and nearly 
 succeeded in winning the throne. Not until the 
 time of Henry IV and the Edict of Nantes (1598) 
 were the Huguenots ever free from persecution. 
 
 Throughout this series of internecine religious 
 conflicts Ramus was principal of the College of 
 Presles, as well as a professor in the College of France. 
 It may, therefore, be well at this point to examine 
 the academic foundations of Paris, in order to get 
 the educational background of our reformer. The 
 colleges of which the University of Paris was com- 
 posed in the sixteenth century, in some instances 
 dated back three or four hundred years. They had 
 started as boarding-houses, with resident masters. 
 
14 PETER RAMUS 
 
 who conducted their students to the Rue du Fouarre, 
 or street upon which the university schools were 
 located and where the instruction was given. Among 
 these 'colleges' was the famous one founded by 
 Robert Sorbon^ in 1257 for lay students in theology, 
 and the College of Presles, established in 1322, of 
 which Ramus was so long the head. The various 
 colleges were intended originally for students from 
 the same district, province, or nation, and owed 
 their foundation to public munificence, private 
 benefaction, or, as in the case of the Sorbonne,^ 
 to both these sources. Now in time it became more 
 convenient to teach the students at home in the 
 colleges than to take them up to the Rue du Fouarre 
 for lectures, and the schools were, by the close of the 
 fifteenth century, practically replaced by the colleges 
 as the centers of instruction in the University of 
 Paris. Some of these institutions afforded only 
 secondary training in grammar, rhetoric, elementary 
 dialectic, and the rudiments of arithmetic, but 
 others combined with this the higher work of the 
 'arts' faculty of the university, which now con- 
 
 * From this sprang the Sorhonne, or College of Liberal Arts of 
 the University of Paris. In the sixteenth century it was the 
 stronghold of conservative theology. 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS 1 5 
 
 sisted almost entirely of logic to the minimizing of 
 the other liberal arts. 'Grammar' schools, or sec- 
 ondary schools proper, had also grown' out of the 
 cathedral schools and spread to the various parishes, 
 so that there was some confusion between secondary 
 and higher education.^ It will later be seen that one 
 of the reforms recommended by Ramus dealt with 
 a more careful definition of these two grades of 
 education.^ 
 
 The way in which the College of France came to 
 be called into being in opposition to the traditional 
 ' arts ' curriculum of the university has already been 
 described in the account of humanism. This new 
 college was really an association for independent 
 thought and research. Salaries from the king's 
 treasury were paid to a body of royal lecturers or 
 professors, of whom Ramus became one through the 
 influence of the Cardinal of Lorraine, and, quite 
 contrary to the usage of the university colleges, no 
 fees were required of the students. The new founda- 
 tion was bitterly opposed by the university and the 
 spread of humanism was fought at every turn. The 
 
 1 Joly, Traite historique des ecoles episcopates et ecclesiastiques, 
 
 p. 304- 
 
 2 See his Advice on the Reformation of the University, on pp. 78-84. 
 
1 6 PETER RAMUS 
 
 contest that arose may, therefore, be described as 
 between the conservative forces of scholasticism, 
 ecclesiasticism, and the masters of the university 
 colleges, on the one hand, and the progressive al- 
 liance of humanism. Protestantism, and the royal 
 lecturers, on the other. Thus Ramus, who through 
 most of his career was a member of both faculties, 
 found himself between two fires. As an avowed 
 humanist and opponent of Aristotle from the begin- 
 ning, he was, we shall see, eventually forced by the 
 logic of the situation to declare publicly and at awful 
 sacrifice his adhesion to Protestantism. 
 
 No doubt before that time several factors had 
 combined to shape his point of view. His own educa- 
 tion at the College of Navarre was of the traditional 
 sort, with its word for word interpretation of Priscian, 
 Donatus, and Alexander of Villedieu in grammar, and 
 its abstractions, trivialities, and hair-splitting dis- 
 putations, depending absolutely upon the authority 
 of the medieval Aristotle. But, Hke most great 
 minds, Ramus was 'the heir to all the ages.' Abe- 
 lard, who moderated the crudities of scholasticism 
 with selections from the classical poets and opposed 
 Plato to the dialectic of Aristotle ; Erasmus, the 
 open enemy of barbarism and the old formulas that 
 
THE TIMES OF RAMUS I7 
 
 held thought captive ; and many of the other human- 
 ists, such as Valla, Vives, Agricola, and Sturm, must 
 all be considered his spiritual forbears. In the 
 preface to his Studies in the Liberal Arts, he says 
 of the visit of Sturm to Paris in 1529 : — 
 
 "Since the fair days of Greece and Rome, Rudolph 
 Agricola is the first to recover the usage of logic 
 and invite the youth to search the poets and orators, 
 not only as the masters of style and eloquence, but as 
 models of reasoning and the art of thinking. Formed 
 at the school of Agricola, Johannes Sturm first made 
 Paris recognize these splendid applications and 
 excited in the university an incredible ardor for 
 the art of which he had revealed the utility. It was 
 in the lessons of this great master that I first learned 
 the use of logic and then taught it to the youth in 
 quite a different spirit from the sophists, relegating 
 to them their furor for disputation." 
 
 But the greatest master of Ramus was Aristotle 
 himself, whom in the medieval form he so bitterly 
 opposed. It will be seen that his logic and spirit 
 were based upon those of the great Stagyrite, when 
 properly comprehended. Undoubtedly, too. Ramus 
 owed much, as he frankly confesses, to Socrates, 
 Plato, Galen, and the Stoics, and even to Cicero and 
 
l8 PETER RAMUS 
 
 Quintilian, whose absolute authority he by no means 
 admitted.^ In his general attitude it is likely that he 
 was indebted to Lefevre and Jean le Masson ('La- 
 tomus'), and in certain parts of his work to Oronce 
 Finee," the mathematician, and to Etienne Dolet, 
 Louis Meigret, Jacques Dubois, and other gramma- 
 rians of his own time and land. But we shall have 
 further opportunity to witness these influences 
 fairly as we follow out the life and work of our re- 
 former. We have now surveyed his intellectual, 
 political, and social setting, and can hold him some- 
 what in perspective. 
 
 * See pp. 42 ff , ' See p. 59. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 The Breach with Aristotle 
 
 Pierre de la Ramee/ later known as Petrus 
 Ramus,^ was born in 1515,^ at Cust,'* Picardy. 
 His struggles to secure an education remind us of the 
 early days of many a more recent scholar and educator. 
 
 1 The chief sources for the life of Ramus are the accounts of his 
 three disciples, — John Thomas Freigius, in a preface to his 
 Commentaries on Ramus' s Discourse on Cicero; Theophilus Banosius, 
 in a preface to Ramus's Posthumous Commentaries on the Christian 
 Religion; and especially Nicholas of Nancel, in his Life of Peter 
 Ramus. Most of the works of Ramus himself also furnish us with 
 a great deal of information. Waddington, Desmaze, and others 
 have endeavored to unify these accounts. 
 
 2 He assumed this Latinized name upon entering college. It is 
 not an exact translation and should rather have been Rameus or 
 c Ramo. 
 
 3 Joly and Goujet give the date of his birth as 1502 on the basis 
 of a note upon the poem, Navarride, by Palma Cayet in 1604, but 
 this former pupil of Ramus had not been associated with him for 
 half a century, and, to judge from the evidence of Freigius and 
 Banosius, his memory played him false. 
 
 * An ancient town on the border of the department of the Oise, 
 a short distance from Noyon, where Calvin was bom. It is also 
 spelt Cultia, Cusia, Cus, Cuz, Cuth, Cut, and in half a dozen other 
 ways. 
 
 19 
 
20 PETER RAMUS 
 
 He was descended from a noble family, but the 
 conquest of Charles the Bold had driven his grand- 
 father from the estate in Burgundy and forced him 
 to become a charcoal burner in an obscure village. 
 The father of Ramus passed his life in labor on a 
 small farm near the same place, and died when Peter 
 was little more than a child. The boy early showed 
 a marked taste for study, and soon exhausted the 
 meager learning of the village schoolmaster. He 
 then pushed on to Paris in pursuit of further knowl- 
 edge, but was twice forced by poverty to return home. 
 At length, however, he obtained employment as a 
 servant^ to a rich student at the College of Navarre,- 
 and thus secured the scholastic opportunities he 
 craved. Though but twelve years of age, young 
 Ramus was large and strong, and undertook to at- 
 tend his master by day and pursue his own studies 
 at night. By attaching a stone to a lighted cord, 
 he provided an automatic alarm for awakening after 
 a few hours of sleep, and, although troubled at 
 
 1 This was not an uncommon procedure with poor students 
 at Paris. Cf. Mullinger, University of Cambridge, 346 f., for a 
 similar situation at that institution. 
 
 2 This institution was founded in 1304 by the queen, Jeanne de 
 Navarre, wife of Philip the Fair, upon the height of Sainte Gene- 
 vieve. See pp. 13 f. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 21 
 
 times with his eyes, his courage was never daunted. 
 In time he passed through the secondary curriculum, 
 and then spent three years and a half upon the higher 
 course of the day in dialectic. This latter period 
 exercised a decisive influence upon his whole career 
 He soon conceived a high esteem for dialectic, to- 
 gether with a disgust for the way it was being taught 
 in the colleges, and began his attack upon Aristotle 
 and scholasticism. What repelled him most was 
 the barrenness of the current dialectic method for 
 any real use in the 'arts' or in life. "When I came 
 to Paris," he tells us,^ "I fell into the subtleties of 
 the sophists, and they taught me the liberal arts 
 through questions and disputes, without ever show- 
 ing me a single thing of profit or service." In his 
 Studies in Dialectic^ he gives a much more detailed 
 and graphic picture of the whole formal and useless 
 method of instruction then in vogue, together with 
 the way in which a new point of view and freedom 
 in thinking eventually came to him. He declares : — 
 "Never amidst the clamors of the college where I 
 passed so many days, months, years, did I ever hear 
 a single word about the applications of logic. I 
 
 1 Remonstrance au conseil privi, p. 24. 
 
 2 Book IV, 151. 
 
22 PETER RAMUS 
 
 had faith then (the scholar ought to have faitli, 
 according to Aristotle) that it was not necessary to 
 trouble myself about what logic is and what its 
 purpose is, but that it concerned itself solely with 
 creating a motive for our clamors and our disputes. 
 I therefore disputed and clamored with all my might. 
 If I were defending in class a thesis according 
 to the categories, I believed it my duty never to 
 yield to my opponent, were he one hundred times 
 right, but to seek some very subtle distinction, in 
 order to obscure the whole issue. On the other 
 hand, were I disputant, all my care and efforts 
 tended not to enlighten my opponent, but to beat 
 I him by some argument, good or bad : even so had I 
 I been taught and directed. The categories of Aris- 
 totle were like a ball that we give children to play 
 with, and that it was necessary to get back by our 
 clamors when we had lost it. If, on the other hand, 
 we should get it, we should not through any outcry 
 allow it to be recovered. I was then persuaded that 
 all dialectic reduced itself to disputing with loud 
 and vigorous cries. 
 
 " Perhaps you will ask me when and how I finally 
 stumbled upon a better method. I will tell you 
 freely and candidly, in order that, if the remedy that 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 23 
 
 rescued me may be useful in your situation, you 
 may use it liberally. I do not seek at all to convince 
 you by argument ; I only wish to explain simply and 
 directly how I emerged from that darkness. After 
 having devoted three years and six months to scholas- 
 tic philosophy, according to the rules of our university ; 
 after having read, discussed, and meditated on the 
 various treatises of the Organon (for of all the books 
 of Aristotle those especially which treated of dialectic 
 were read and reread during the course of three 
 years) ; even after, I say, having put in all that time, 
 reckoning up the years completely occupied by the 
 study of the scholastic arts, I sought to learn to 
 what end I could, as a consequence, apply the knowl- 
 edge I had acquired with so much toil and fatigue. 
 I soon perceived that all this dialectic had not ren- 
 dered me more learned in history and the knowledge 
 of antiquity, nor more skillful in eloquence, nor 
 a better poet, nor wiser in anything. Ah, what a 
 stupefaction, what a grief ! How I did accuse my 
 deficiencies ! How I did deplore the misfortune of 
 my destiny, the barrenness of a mind that after so 
 much labor could not gather or even perceive the 
 fruits of that wisdom which was alleged to be 
 found so abundantly in the dialectic of Aristotle ! 
 
24 PETER RAMUS 
 
 *' I finally came upon a book of Galen on the 
 thoughts of Hippocrates and Plato.* That parallel of 
 Plato with Hippocrates furnished me much enjoy- 
 ment, but it inspired me with a much greater desire 
 to read all the dialogues of Plato which treated of 
 dialectic. Then it was, to speak the truth, that I 
 found the haven so long desired. . . . That which I 
 especially enjoyed and e\'en loved in Plato was the 
 method by which Socrates refuted false opinions, 
 attempting first of all to raise his hearers above the 
 senses, prejudices, and traditions of men, in order 
 to lead them to their own natural sense of right and 
 liberty of judgment. For it appeared to him insane 
 that a philosopher should allow himself to act 
 according to the opinions of the masses, which for 
 the most part are false and deceitful, rather than 
 
 1 Ramus refers to the Ilepi twv iTrTroKparous koI XIAaTcovos 
 8oy/wiT<i)v. See Galeni Opera (Kuhn ed.), V, i8i ff. Plato believed 
 that the nature of the mind could be discovered by a method 
 similar to that by which Hippocrates investigated the nature of 
 the body. Probably Ramus was little acquainted with Greek at 
 the time, and was indebted for his knowledge to a Latin trans- 
 lation of Galen by Theodoric Gerard, which Sturm had published. 
 See Guggenheim, Beitrdge zur Biographic des Ramus, p. 141. 
 Ramus later admitted this, as we find from the preface to his 
 Proeme des Matkematiques (1567) and at the beginning of his 
 ScholcT in liber ales arks (1569). 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 25 
 
 apply himself to ascertaining only the facts and their 
 true causes. In short, I began to say to myself (I 
 should have hesitated to say it to another) : ' Well, 
 what hinders me from ' socratizing ' a little, and 
 examining, independently of the authority of Aris- 
 totle, whether that doctrine of his dialectic is the 
 most true and useful ? Perhaps that philosopher has 
 abused us by his authority, and in that case, I need 
 not have been surprised at having studied his books 
 without deriving any profit from them, when they 
 contained none. . . . And what if that whole doc- 
 trine should prove a delusion?' " 
 
 Thus Ramus gradually broke with the scholastic 
 philosophy and the Aristotelianism of the day. But, 
 owing to his impulsive nature and the impetuosity 
 of youth, as well as to the immoderate and con- 
 troversial temper of the times. Ramus, once con- 
 vinced, pushed his opposition to an extreme, and 
 became straightway an ardent reformer, if not a 
 revolutionist. He attacked without discretion the 
 great idol of the day, whose word was revered as that 
 of an oracle and upon the basis of whose dialectic 
 the Church had built her doctrine.^ But his very 
 
 1 Aristotle several times narrowly escaped being canonized in 
 the Middle Ages. See Cousin, Cours, 2 serie, t. II, p. 240. 
 
26 PETER RAMUS 
 
 vehemence attracted attention and enlisted a large 
 number of partisans. His first opportunity for a 
 public combat came with his master's examination 
 in 1536/ when he formulated as his subject for dis- 
 putation the audacious proposition: "All that 
 Aristotle has said is false. "^ In developing his 
 subject, he maintained in the first place that the 
 writings attributed to Aristotle were spurious, and 
 secondly that they contained only errors.^ His 
 disputants, the judges, were impaled on the horns of 
 a dilemma, since they could not, as was their wont, 
 appeal to the authority of Aristotle without begging 
 the question. They were unable to make any head- 
 way against the youthful disputant. As a result, 
 after assailing his thesis for a whole day and ha\dng 
 their arguments refuted with great spirit, subtlety, 
 and directness, they were at length obliged to admit 
 the candidate to the degree with honors. 
 
 This paradox of the young scholar startled all 
 the universities of France, and quickly spread to 
 Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. The academic 
 world stood aghast at his audacity. If Ramus were 
 
 • According to custom, this probably occurred in Lent. 
 ' QiUBCumque ah Aristotele dicta essent, commentitia esse. 
 ' Freigius, op. cit., pp. 9 fif. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 27 
 
 right, all the universities of Europe were wrong. He 
 was denounced by many scholars as an ingrate on 
 the ground that he had used the weapons supplied 
 by Aristotle to attack the donor himself. To this 
 he replied in the very words of Aristotle, when that 
 philosopher declared that he preferred the truth 
 even to his master, Plato: "Had my own father 
 promulgated those errors, my attack should not 
 lack force and persistency. The truth is more 
 precious and dear to me than my father himself, 
 and I shall hold myself guilty to let my regard for 
 a single person stand in the way of all." ^ 
 
 Thus when barely twenty-one, the son of a poor 
 widow became one of the most striking figures 
 within the realm of intellect. The attainment of 
 his degree entitled him literally to become a ' master ' 
 in the university, and he began his labors at the 
 College of the Mans^ under the auspices of Jean 
 Hennuyer. This scholar, who had been his teacher 
 in philosophy at the College of Navarre, was prob- 
 ably likewise a professor at Mans,^ and Ramus may 
 have been substituting for him. At any rate, he 
 
 ' AristoteliccB Animadversiones, fol. 73-75. 
 
 2 See pp. 13 f. 
 
 ' See Du Boulay, Hist, de VUniv. de Paris, t. VI, 952. 
 
jS peter ramus 
 
 did not stay here long, but undertook to start at the 
 little college of Ave Maria, in opposition to the 
 Aristotelians, an education more in conformity with 
 his own ideal. He associated with himself in this 
 endeavor Omer Talon of Beauvais, an able professor 
 of rhetoric, who ever afterward remained a close 
 friend and enthusiastic supporter of his educational 
 reforms, and Barthelemy Alexandre of Champagne, 
 a noted Greek scholar, who could teach the Hellenic 
 philosophers and orators in the original. 
 
 Here, for the first time in any college of the Univer- 
 sity of Paris, Greek and Latin authors were read at 
 the same time, and the study of 'eloquence,' or classi- 
 cal literature, was joined with that of philosophy, 
 and of the poets with the orators. His plan for 
 enlarging the breadth and culture of higher instruc- 
 tion proved interesting, stimulating, and almost 
 dramatic. The students flocked to hear Ramus, 
 whose reputation as an orator was established the 
 first day. This remarkable success he followed up by 
 planning to reform the work of the university in 
 general and the arts faculty in particular. He 
 put in several years forgetting much of what he had 
 learned at the College of Navarre and in recon- 
 structing all the liberal arts. He especially en- 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 2g 
 
 deavored to continue his reform in dialectic, and 
 foresaw in the application of this subject to the other 
 liberal arts the keystone to the entire arch, and at 
 that point he centered the structure opposed to Aris- 
 totle and the medieval philosophy founded upon 
 him. In this progressive step toward real human- 
 istic study and fruitful logic he probably had as 
 guides such writings as the Sapiens (1522) and 
 De Disciplinis (1531) of Vives,' which must have 
 been well known to him, and the lectures on dialectic 
 of Sturm,^ who had just completed his seven years 
 of teaching at Paris. The masters in the College 
 of Ave Maria, then, made their lectures attractive 
 and practical by seeking illustrations and models of 
 the operations of the mind in the classical poets and 
 orators, thus verifying in an interesting way the 
 rules of logic and banishing the barren disputes that 
 had long held sway at the university. "As the 
 result of a happy thought," says Ramus,- "I put 
 forth the proposition that the masters of the uni- 
 versity were grievously in error to suppose that the 
 liberal arts were well taught in making of them mere 
 interrogations and syllogisms, and that the whole 
 of this sophistry should be cast aside and the 
 
 1 See p. 17. - Remonstrance an conseil prive, p. 25. 
 
30 PETER RAMUS 
 
 subjects should rather explain and suggest real 
 usage." 
 
 To crystalHze this position, Ramus in 1543 pub- 
 lished in Latin two epoch-making books on logic, 
 the Divisions or Institutions of Dialectic^ and the 
 Animadversions on Aristotle? In the former work 
 he stated dogmatically a number of elementary 
 principles of logic in terse and elegant language. 
 This treatise, however, had in it little that was con- 
 troversial, with the exception of the brief introduc- 
 tion, but the latter work consisted in a fierce 
 onslaught upon Aristotle, filled with the bitter 
 invective that was characteristic of the age and his 
 own impulsiveness. It was most unfair and indis- 
 creet in its critical analysis of the great logician, 
 representing him as a 'sophist,' an 'impostor,' 
 and a 'sacrilegious man,' and his disciples as 'bar- 
 barians,' whose disputes were barren and noisy. 
 He ridiculed and condemned with great force and 
 eloquence their subtleties and foUies of all sorts. 
 He boldly declared himself the opponent of a routine, 
 and the apostle of freedom of thought, and he held 
 himself ready to encounter all labors and dangers, 
 
 ^ DialecticcB partitiones ad Academiam Parisiensem (in later edi- 
 tions called DialecticcB inslitutiones), 
 2 Aristotelicce animadversiones. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 3 1 
 
 in order to destroy the sophistry of his opponents, 
 even to the extent of laying down his Hfe for the 
 cause.-^ Finally, he reiterated the famous paradox 
 of his master's disputation with scarcely any modera- 
 tion,^ and discharged a fusillade of abuse at the 
 effete teachings of the professors in the faculty of arts. 
 So determined an attack upon the Aristotelian 
 citadel could no longer be passed over unnoticed, 
 and the Peripatetics massed themselves for battle. 
 Ramus, too, seems to have understood fully what 
 the consequences of his treatises were likely to be. 
 He undertook to intrench himself behind the good 
 will of the king, Francis I, to whom he pre- 
 sented a handsome copy of the Divisions of Dialectic, 
 together with a eulogy of his reign and wishes for his 
 prosperity.^ With a similar motive he dedicated the 
 Animadversions to two former college mates, both 
 afterwards cardinals, Charles of Lorraine and Charles 
 of Bourbon, and appealed to their kindness of heart, 
 
 1 See Animadversioncs, fol. 15 v. 
 
 2 His later works on the subject, notably the ScholcB dialectics, 
 were much less extreme and vehement, and were directed rather 
 against the scholastic interpretation of Aristotle than the master 
 himself. 
 
 ^ Waddington {Ramus, p. 37) says this volume is in the Bih- 
 Uotheque ImpSriale (now Nationale), No. 6659, of the Latin manu- 
 scripts, and quotes from the dedication (pp. 421 ff.). 
 
32 PETER RAMUS 
 
 which lie declared had often been experienced by 
 himself and had been much praised by their revered 
 master, Hennuyer. While these precautions were 
 well taken, they were not sufficient to withstand the 
 storm that immediately arose and broke over the 
 head of Ramus. The conservative masters of the 
 university, perceiving the sympathy of the students 
 for the \'igorous reformer, and fearing a revolution, 
 were alarmed and enraged. The rector of the 
 university, Pierre Galland, principal of the College 
 of Boncour, especially felt himself aggrieved, and, 
 while taking no overt step, secretly urged two well- 
 known masters to expose the fallacies of Ramus. 
 These men were Perion, a professor of theology, who 
 had made a pretentious and inaccurate translation 
 of Aristotle, and Govea, a conservative, but rather 
 learned and witty jurist. The arraignments of 
 Ramus, which they were only too eager to make, 
 were filled with pedantry and invective, and in- 
 timated that dire calamities were in store for the 
 reformer, should he not repent and 'make his 
 peace with honest folk.' ^ Their defense of Aristotle 
 had more force than point, and the writings of that 
 
 ^ As sources, see (i) Perionii pro Aristotelc in Petrum Ramiim 
 orationes II and (2) EispanicB hibliothcca, t. II, class. VTI, pp. 300 f . 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 33 
 
 philosopher, with their austere dignity, would have 
 proved by themselves a more weighty answer than 
 these violent and unjust anathemas of his dis- 
 ciples. 
 
 Galland, however, was succeeded the following 
 year^ by Guillaume de Montuelle, principal of the 
 College of Beauvais, who acted with more direct- 
 ness in the matter. He at once presented the 
 two offending works to the faculty of theology for 
 censure, and when this had been passed, he had the 
 university ask the civic authorities to suppress the 
 books. Ramus was summoned before the provost of 
 Paris as an enemy to religion and the public peace 
 and a corrupter of youth, and at the request of 
 Govea, who acted as the university's advocate, the 
 case was brought before the Parlement- of Paris. 
 Then, since the procedure of this tribunal appeared 
 too deliberate and regular to satisfy the anger of 
 the Aristotelians, Galland got Pierre du Chastel, 
 
 1 The term of the rector's office was but one year. 
 
 - The functions of this body are not to be confused with those 
 of a parliament. The local parlements, of which that of Paris was 
 the most important, were primarily higher law courts, but, in addi- 
 tion to trying cases, they claimed the right to register or disapprove 
 the decrees of the king, and maintain certain other legislative 
 powers. 
 
 D 
 
34 PETER RAMUS 
 
 bishop of M^con and a close friend of the king, to 
 intervene and bring the complaint to the royal notice 
 at once. Francis, finding the growing tempest and 
 uproar unendurable and wishing it to subside as 
 quickly as possible, referred the case, at Du Chastel's 
 suggestion, to a commission of five, two of whom were 
 to be chosen by each side and a fifth by the king. 
 Ramus succeeded in getting two talented personal 
 friends to act for him, but, although their arguments 
 completely vanquished the other three judges, 
 who were zealous Aristotehans, they were overborne 
 and withdrew from the farcical trial in disgust. 
 Sentence was then pronounced upon the defendant 
 as follows : — 
 
 "Our most Christian king, in his love for phil- 
 osophy and liberal studies, has committed to us the 
 task of examining the book which P. Ramus has 
 published against Aristotle under the title of Animad- 
 versions on Aristotle and of passing judgment upon 
 it. We have read the book carefully and have 
 examined and weighed every one of its propositions 
 and have come to this decision : Ramus has acted 
 rashly, arrogantly, and impudently, in undertaking 
 to condemn and impugn the art of logic, which has 
 been accepted among all nations; and which he 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 35 
 
 himself does not understand at all. Moreover, the 
 reproaches which he heaps upon Aristotle are of such 
 a kind as to exhibit his ignorance and stupidity, as 
 well as his wickedness and bad faith, since he repre- 
 hends many of the truest doctrines, and attributes 
 much to Aristotle that this philosopher has never 
 held. In short, his book contains nothing but 
 fictions and scurrilous slanders. Wherefore, we 
 have judged that it is to the best interest of the 
 republic of letters that this book be suppressed by all 
 possible means, and that his other book, Institutions ^ 
 of Dialectic, which also contains many statements 
 that are untrue and falsely attributed, shall be 
 treated likewise." ^ 
 
 Thus not only was the Animadversions not granted 
 a fair trial, but even the more constructive work of 
 Ramus was condemned without even being ex- 
 amined, solely because it was by the same author. 
 The king, who boasted of his title of 'father of let- 
 ters/ was swayed by the clamors and confirmed the 
 unjust decision and did everything possible to make 
 it effective. In his decree, after giving a lengthy 
 
 ' See footnote on p. 30. 
 
 2 The original text is given in Du Boulay, Hist, de I' Univ. de Paris, 
 t. VI, p. 394. 
 
36 PETER RAMUS 
 
 account of the trouble that had disturbed his 'dear 
 and beloved daughter, the University of Paris,' ^ and 
 of the trial that had ensued, he declares : — 
 
 "Be it known that we have condemned, suppressed, 
 and abolished the said books, and made prohibitions 
 and warnings to all printers and booksellers of our 
 kingdom, fiefs, domains, and seigniories, and to all 
 our other subjects of whatever estate and condition, 
 that they neither print, spread abroad, sell, or utter 
 the said books, in our kingdom, fiefs, and seigniories, 
 under pain of confiscation of their books or of corporal 
 punishment. And likewise to the said Ramus that 
 he neither lecture upon said books nor have them 
 written or copied or spread abroad in any manner, 
 and that he do not lecture on dialectic or philosophy 
 of any sort whatsoever, without our express per- 
 mission, and also he no longer use such slanders and 
 invectives against Aristotle or other ancient authors 
 received and approved, or against our said daughter, 
 the university, under the penalties above mentioned. 
 So we commend and decree to our provost of Paris, 
 
 1 La fille ainee du roi de France, ' the eldest daughter of the king 
 of France,' was the name given in 151 5 by Francis I to the Univer- 
 sity of Paris and generally used after that. See Pasquier, Recherches 
 de la France, p. 811. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 37 
 
 that he may cause the present ordinance and judg- 
 ment to be executed." ^ 
 
 The edict of the king was registered by the parle- 
 ment without opposition, and was pubUshed by 
 trumpet and posted in French and Latin in all parts of 
 the city. It was dispatched throughout France, and 
 sent to foreign towns and universities to vindicate 
 the orthodoxy of Paris. It was received by the 
 conservatives of the university with transports of 
 joy. The obnoxious books were burnt in front of 
 the College of Cambrai by one of the biased judges, 
 and the Peripatetics indulged in a greater celebration 
 than would ordinarily be held after a military 
 victory.^ Some of his opponents, however, regretted 
 that the king had let Ramus off with so light a penalty, 
 and insisted that he should have been exiled or sent to 
 the galleys as a common malefactor,^ Ramus, how- 
 ever, could do nothing except submit to these indig- 
 
 1 Given in full in Du Boulay, op. ciL, t.VI, p. 657 ; Charpentier, 
 Ad expositionem disputationis demethodo Responsio; and La Choix 
 du Maine, Bibliotheques Franqoises under Pierre de la RamSe; 
 Niceron, Memoires, XIII. 
 
 - This was the testimony given by Genebrard in his eulogy at 
 the funeral of Danes, the judge who burnt the book of Ramus. 
 See Vie, Eloges, et Opusades de Pierre Danes. (Paris, 1871, p. 90.) 
 
 ^ See Charpentier, Animadversiones in Dialecticarum Institutiones 
 P. Rami, fol. 13 r. 
 
38 PETER RAMUS 
 
 nities and conceal his resentment as much as pos- 
 sible. Later he declared with his characteristic 
 philosophy : — 
 
 "I had undertaken to make known the principles 
 of Socrates, and found that I had drawn upon my- 
 self the same sort of calamity as that which over- 
 whelmed him. For a complete resemblance my case 
 lacked only the hemlock." ^ 
 
 Nevertheless, Ramus seems not to have been alto- 
 gether silenced. It was only philosophy that he was 
 forbidden to teach, and in the very year of his con- 
 viction (1544) we find him at work as usual with 
 Talon and Alexandre at their college.^ While he 
 could not deal with logic or any part of philosophy, 
 and confined himself entirely to the classics and 
 mathematics,^ he still defended the union of literary 
 studies with philosophy. Moreover, Talon was not 
 in the least intimidated, and publicly announced 
 
 ' ScholcR mathematics, 1. Ill, p. 74. 
 
 2 There are still preserved the addresses of the three colleagues 
 to their students in November, — Tres orationes a tribus liberalium 
 disciplinarum professoribus, Petro Ramo, Audomaro Talceo, Bar- 
 tholomceo Alexandra, LuteticB in gymnasio Mariano habitcB. 
 
 ^ During this period he made his first Latin translation of Euclid, 
 which he anonymously dedicated to his patron, the Cardinal of 
 Lorraine. More will be heard of his mathematical publications 
 later on. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 39 
 
 his complete agreement with the position taken by 
 Ramus and his intention to rescue philosophy from 
 the darkness in which it was groping. He praised the 
 Animadversions most heartily and announced that 
 he would produce a similar work on rhetoric.^ 
 
 The next year an even more favorable opportun- 
 ity presented itself to the two reformers. Ramus 
 was invited by Lesage, the aged principal of the 
 College of Presles, to take charge of this historic 
 school.- The college was badly run down in finances 
 and attendance, but, through the eloquence and im- 
 proved management of Ramus, it shortly became 
 one of the best.^ Here, with the assistance of Talon, 
 who soon followed him to Presles, Ramus continued 
 to introduce the same reforms and even to push 
 them further. He had the temerity to announce as 
 the subject of his first lectures that passage of The 
 Republic of Cicero that treats of Platonic philosophy, 
 and, in spite of the ban upon his lecturing upon the 
 subject, he commented without reserve, on the ground 
 of teaching the classics or 'eloquence,' upon the 
 
 ^ Collectan. proefaL, epist. (1577), pp. 19 ff. 
 
 -It was founded in 13 14 by Raoul de Presles, a secretary of 
 Philip the Fair, according to Waddington. Farrington, from 
 Jourdain and Chauvin, estimates 1322 as the date. 
 
 ' See Nicholas of Nancel, Rami vUa, p. 19. 
 
40 PETER RAMUS 
 
 Dream of Scipio} Moreover, the two friends again 
 taught the Latin and Greek authors in the same class, 
 and joined the study of 'eloquence' with that of 
 philosophy. While not nominally permitted to teach 
 philosophy himself, Ramus still insisted upon the need 
 of the union of the two lines of study, and in October, 
 1546, delivered his oration upon the subject.^ To 
 carry out this idea and yet live within the interdict, 
 it was arranged that Talon should give a course on 
 philosophy in the morning, while Ramus lectured 
 in the afternoon upon rhetoric, illustrating through 
 the poets, orators, and other authors the usage and 
 application of the principles of logic. This double 
 f system of lectures was in itself a startling innovation, 
 but Ramus undertook to show that it was in keeping 
 with the intention and example of Aristotle and with 
 the practice at the College of France,^ and expressed 
 the hope that the plan might become general in the 
 university colleges also. 
 
 Such vitality and attractiveness in instruction not 
 only seemed destructive of the ' arts ' traditions, but 
 soon lured students in large numbers away from all 
 
 1 His Somnium Scipionis ex libro sexto Ciceronis de Republica 
 Petri Rami praledionibus explicatum was published in 1 546. 
 
 * Oratio de studiis philosophic et eloquenticE conjiigendis. 
 
 * See pp. 4 and 15 f. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 41 
 
 the other colleges. This was a constant source of 
 grievance to the conservatives, and, failing in their 
 attempt to make trouble between Ramus and the 
 retired principal, Lesage,^ they constantly complained 
 ofScially of this ' subversion of the College of Presles.' ^ 
 On several occasions the rectors felt called upon to 
 investigate, and once Ramus was haled before the 
 parlement by Galland for this revolutionary offense, 
 but through the influence of his patron, Charles of 
 Lorraine, he was acquitted.^ Moreover, by the 
 fortunate circumstance of the succession of Henry II 
 to the throne in 1547, the power of this cardinal 
 protector, who had been the preceptor of the new 
 monarch, was greatly increased, and almost his 
 first act was to procure from the king an abrogation 
 of the edict against Ramus. The ecclesiastical favor- 
 ite showed the king the necessity to philosophy of 
 freedom in thinking and of the right to adopt or 
 reject without limitation the opinions of Plato, 
 Aristotle, or any other thinker. The king promptly 
 
 ^ Banosius, pp. 9 f. ; Nancel, p. 18. The accusation of having 
 forced out the old principal was repeated a decade later by his worst 
 enemy, Charpentier {Animadversiones adversus P. Ramum, 1555, 
 fol. 4v., ei alibi). 
 
 2 See Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, p. 399. Ramus was repeatedly 
 denominated turbator collegii Prcellei. 
 
 2 Ramus, Pro phil. disciplina (in Collectan. prccfat., p. 310). 
 
42 PETER RAMUS 
 
 canceled the interdict and the parlement registered 
 his decision. Thus, says Ramus, " the true God who 
 knows to what end he has produced his creatures, 
 reserved the conclusion of my case for the good King 
 Henry, who having heard the controversy recounted, 
 unbound my tongue and hands, and gave me the 
 right and power to pursue my studies." ' 
 
 This gave Ramus a latitude in pursuing his studies 
 and literary work that he was not slow to utilize. In 
 the Academy {i.e. University) of Talon he had the 
 story of his persecutions narrated, and through the 
 offices of the same friend there were published new 
 editions of the two condemned books with many 
 modifications and additions. Ramus himself withhi 
 a few years collected his commentaries on the letters 
 of Plato and on the orations and rhetorical works of 
 Cicero and Quintilian in eight or ten publications,^ 
 dedicating most of them to his powerful patron, the 
 
 1 See Remonstrance au conscil prive (1567), p. 25. 
 
 ^ Bnttince qitastiones in Oratorem Cicevjvis. 1547 and 1549; 
 RhetoricB distincHones (in Quintilianum) , 1 549 ; Platonis epistolce 
 a Petro Ramo latince Jactce, et didecticis rerum sunimis brcvilef 
 expositce, 1549; M. T. Ciceronis dc fato liber, 1550; M. T. Cice- 
 ronis epistola nona ad P. Lcntuluni dialedicis rerum summis brevitet 
 illustrata, 1550; M. T. Ciceronis pro Caio Ruhirio perduellionis rea 
 or alio, 1551 ; Prcelectiones in librum I Ciceronis de legibus, 1552 j 
 M. T. Ciceronis de lege agraria, 1552. 
 
THE BREACH WITH AEISTOTLE 43 
 
 cardinal. In these writings Ramus called for a 
 more humanistic and methodical treatment of 
 rhetoric, and even ventured to criticize Cicero and 
 Quintilian. This insurgency precipitated new at- 
 tacks by the conservatives. His old opponent Perion, 
 who had attacked the Ajiimadversions, now took up 
 the cudgels as vigorously in defense of Cicero. In 
 the dedication of his work to Du Chastel, who had 
 brought the former case before the king, he virtuously 
 declares: "You know that I defended Aristotle 
 against Ramus four years ago in a lengthy speech and 
 I now believe that I cannot give up Cicero, the father 
 of Roman eloquence, to him without a defense." ^ 
 And addressing the professors of all faculties, he 
 recalls his former predictions and the threat of 
 Ramus to reform all the arts, and "not to stop 
 until logic has been entirely delivered from the dark- 
 ness of Aristotle and it has been shown how it ought 
 to be applied to all sciences." ' Perion, therefore, 
 appeals in alarm to his fellow-masters against 
 "Ramus, who is preparing to reject Hippocrates 
 and Galen, Euclid and Archimedes, and to declare 
 that you are ignorant of medicine, geometry, and 
 
 1 Fro Cictronk Oratvte contra Petrum Ramum oratio. 
 
 2 Preface to the Platonis epistolce lalince facta. 
 
44 PETER RAMUS 
 
 astronomy," and beseeches all "who cherish Cicero 
 as the father of eloquence to resist Ramus, who 
 repudiates skill and judgment."^ This absurd out- 
 burst he followed by reprinting his former speeches in 
 defense of Aristotle against the Animadversions.^ 
 
 But this excited response was tame in comparison 
 with the invective that was heaped upon Ramus 
 because of his criticism of Quintilian. Galland, who 
 had stirred up much of the fury over the Animadver- 
 sions , was quite as indignant at the attack of a pro- 
 fessor of rhetoric upon Quintilian as at a logician 
 for a criticism of Aristotle. In the dedication of his 
 edition of Quintilian^ to Du Chastel, he assails Ramus 
 as 'the corrupter of youth' and as a man guilty of 
 nearly all the vices and crimes in the calendar. 
 While Ramus followed his custom of not replying to 
 these anathemas, the whole discussion seems to 
 have reached such absurd proportions as to amuse 
 many outside the university circle, and to be of 
 enough moment to attract the humor of the satirist, 
 Rabelais, and the poet, Du Bellay. Much fun is 
 poked at this Petromachy or ' war of the Peters, ' and 
 various changes are rung on the easy puns upon 
 
 ' Perion, Pro Ciceronis Orator e, fol. 3. 
 
 2 See pp. 32 f. \ Paris, 1549. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 45 
 
 Peter {' Yock') , Ramus ('branch'), and Galland ('gal- 
 lant').' 
 
 In fact, this whole ' tempest in a teapot ' might 
 have subsided through ridicule, had it not been for 
 the entry of a new and more vigorous champion into 
 the lists against Ramus. This was Jacques Char- 
 pentier or 'Carpentarius,' a professor in the College 
 of Boncour and a former pupil of Galland, who re- 
 mained until death the vicious and implacable enemy 
 of Ramus. He came of a rich and well-known family 
 with many powerful patrons, especially among the 
 clergy, and he had at the age of twenty-five manipu- 
 lated himself into the rectorship of the university. 
 Thinking to signalize his induction into office by a 
 popular stroke, and urged perhaps by Galland, he 
 began by bringing, in the name of the University, 
 trumped-up charges against Ramus and accusing him 
 of violations of the rules. He declared in particular 
 that the professors of the College of Presles, contrary 
 to university statute, expounded the poets and ora- 
 tors, instead of confining themselves to philosophy. 
 Then, without any investigation of the teaching or any 
 defense from Ramus, in a packed meeting of his cabi- 
 
 1 Rabelais, Pantagruel, 1. IV, Prologue ; Du Bellay, Satyre de 
 Maistre Pierre Cuignet sur la Petromachie de VUniversite de Paris; etc. 
 
46 PETER RAMUS 
 
 net, he had the students of that college debarred from 
 the degrees and privileges of the university. A sharp 
 controversy followed, in which Carpentarius accused 
 Ramus of treason to the university.^ And the latter 
 was convicted by a biased commission of six selected 
 from the higher faculties. An appeal was had to the 
 parlement, and once more Ramus was given his 
 rights through the influence of the Cardinal of Lorraine, 
 The usual slow procedure was somewhat expedited, 
 and the vigorous defense made by Ramus for aca- 
 demic freedom in interpreting Aristotle and other 
 authors and his protest against the tyrannical rules 
 and abuses of the university won him from fair- 
 minded judges a favorable verdict. Although the 
 University custom was sustained by requiring 
 the reformer to explain the regular authors in the 
 way prescribed by the statutes, he was permitted 
 upon holidays, feast days, Sundays, and such hours 
 as were left open by the rules, to teach whatever 
 authors he chose and as freely as he liked. This 
 amounted to giving him nearly two thirds of the year 
 to interpret as he wished. 
 
 ' The response u!" Ramus to this charge is embodied in his Pro 
 philosophica Parisiensi^ academic disciplina oratio, which he de- 
 livered in 1 55 1. 
 
THE BREACH WITH ARISTOTLE 47 
 
 But to prevent any recurrence of this chicanery 
 and persecution, the cardinal now persuaded the 
 king to establish a new chair of Eloquence and 
 Philosophy at the College of France, and appoint 
 Ramus to the position. This step was taken, and, 
 while as principal of the College of Presles, Ramus 
 was still amenable to the University, as lecturer 
 at the Royal College he became dependent only 
 upon the king. He was thus afforded an unwonted 
 freedom to develop his reforms, and the hostility 
 and envy of the Aristotelians and conservatives was 
 for a brief space estopped. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 Professor in the Royal College 
 
 Ramus began his new duties in the fall of 1551. 
 Although only thirty-six, his fame was widespread. 
 The virulence of his enemies and the stubborn 
 opposition of the conservatives, quite as much as 
 his own brilliance and the worth of his reforms, had 
 centered the attention of the intellectual world 
 upon him. His opening address at the College of 
 France was attended by many masters of the 
 university, members of the parlement, higher clergy, 
 and persons in all classes to the number of two 
 thousand.^ The importance of the occasion as a 
 crisis in his career and the eloquence of the orator 
 will perhaps justify quoting this inaugural speech^ 
 at some length : — 
 
 "There are two things, my hearers, which at the 
 
 1 Banosius, p. 10 ; Nancel, p. 20 ; Zwinger, Theatrmn humana 
 vUce, p. 3697, col. b. 
 
 ^ This inaugural address (Oratio initio siicb professionis habita) 
 was published the same year and is still extant. 
 
 48 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 49 
 
 beginning of my professorship every one will ex- 
 pect from me ; in the first place, that I express my 
 thanks to those through whom I have been chosen for 
 this position ; in the second place, that I explain 
 to you the reason for my appointment to the office. 
 On the 6th of August, when Charles, Cardinal of 
 Lorraine, brought the case of my teaching to the 
 notice of King Henry, it pleased the king that I 
 should be among the number and body of the royal 
 professors, and that, as I have done from the begin- 
 ning, I should teach ' eloquence ' at the same time 
 with philosophy, and he announced that decision 
 to me in an epistle couched in terms of special 
 honor. Wherefore, I am exceedingly grateful to 
 Henry of Valois, most Christian of kings, and shall be 
 as long as life endures. For, my hearers, if a father 
 with helpless children should find silver, gold, and 
 great and precious wealth that had been left by his 
 ancestors, and yet could not on account of the rocks 
 and the roughness of the ground either carry it home 
 or share it with his children; and at length some 
 Hercules, having pitied the wretched fortune of the 
 father, should rid the place of rocks and roughness, 
 and should make it quite possible for him to take 
 it away, share, and enjoy it, would not that happy 
 
50 PETER RAMUS 
 
 father exult with exceeding great joy ? Wliat thanks 
 he would give to that Hercules ! 
 
 " But I was just such a wretched father for years. 
 Many pupils had been committed to my care and 
 affection, and the great and precious wealth of 
 ' eloquence ' and philosophy I saw had been left as an 
 inheritance in the works of the ancient orators, poets, 
 and philosophers, but overlooked through the care- 
 lessness of the heirs. And when I desired to collect 
 it rationally and systematically, to use it suitably in 
 life, and share it with my pupils, incredibly harsh 
 conditions hindered and opposed my efforts. Nay, 
 even my hands were fettered, lest I should take it, 
 and my lips were sealed, lest I tell some one of it, and 
 I was forbidden to disclose anything by speech or 
 writing. Meanwhile, King Henry, a Gallic Hercules, 
 as it were, came to aid me in my distress, and, four 
 years ago, at the request of Charles, Cardinal of 
 Lorraine, unloosed my hands and tongue, and gave 
 me the power of teaching, practicing, and illustrat- 
 ing * eloquence ' and philosophy. And within the last 
 few days, when he perceived that the old burdens 
 were being renewed and made heavier, he even more 
 bountifully and magnificently revealed his kindness 
 and decreed that my labors should be not only 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 5 1 
 
 unfettered, but even honored with a royal stipend. 
 Wherefore, O Henry, most Christian king, should I 
 say that I owe the life within this body to thee, who 
 dost free, support, and honor me, I should put it 
 mildly. I owe to thee that which is far dearer than 
 my body and life, — my soul, whose labors and vigils 
 are nourished and live through thy benefits, and, I 
 hope, will be nourished and live to herald thy praise 
 to future ages. . . . 
 
 " The second place for thanks, my hearers, is due to 
 Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine, who, as soon as he 
 knew my straits, offered to become my patron and 
 protector, — a real Maecenas in his love of letters 
 and in his zeal and aid in reHeving virtue. Nor 
 was he attracted by my meager ability so much as 
 induced by the remarkable excellence of his own 
 nature and training. I declare the truth, without fear 
 of contradiction, — since the memory of very many 
 still living and present mil bear witness and give 
 credence to my speech, — when I say that Charles 
 of Lorraine from early years was so greatly devoted 
 to learning and virtue that all of us who knew him 
 admired the eager mind of the youth. His atten- 
 tion in listening to the master, his meditation and 
 study of what had been taught, his pains in imitat- 
 
52 PETER RAMUS 
 
 ing the example of the author expounded, and his 
 efforts in practicing every variety of speaking and 
 writing were of the very highest. Only recently I 
 have read an elegy of most brilliant language and 
 thought written by him in the midst of an exceed- 
 ingly busy Hfe; so sound is the fruit of his well- 
 rooted learning. . . . 
 
 *'In my most bitter hours, as I have before inti- 
 mated, when I was surrounded on all sides by every 
 sort of annoyance, Charles of Lorraine was my sole 
 comforter. It is he that has taught King Henry at 
 all times to be liberal in philosophy toward every one. 
 Therefore, attribute to Charles of Lorraine the credit 
 for my being freed and restored by King Henry, and 
 for the four years that I have pursued my studies in 
 peace. As the latest favor, this last winter, when I 
 was indicted and called into court, because I joined 
 'eloquence' with philosophy (in my teaching), how 
 great was his kindness and equity in perceiving and 
 expediting the whole affair ! He heard first that a 
 most serious charge had been made. Some one 
 declared that I was an Academic, an enemy to God 
 and humanity, flouting all laws, human and divine, 
 and even teaching my pupils to scorn them, that I 
 expounded misleading passages of St. Augustine in 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 53 
 
 the interest of unbridled and impious license, and 
 that, in order to abuse unguarded minds more 
 easily, I wished to eliminate all logical disputations 
 (from the curriculum of my college). 
 
 " When the cardinal told me at dinner of this and 
 bade me answer, — ' Alas ! ' I cried, ' my Maecenas, 
 what do I hear ? Out of what occurrences in my 
 entire life could any one fabricate so false a suspicion 
 and base a slander ? For I subscribe to, know, and 
 approve of no curriculum, save that which is con- 
 sistent and harmonious with the true and useful 
 precepts of grammar, rhetoric, and philosophy, our 
 state, and the Christian religion. Quite contrary to 
 this absurd piece of mendacity, I maintain the 
 principles of the true and useful arts, illustrate them 
 with examples, and exercise and practice them daily. 
 So far am I from scorning them or teaching others 
 to do so ! My books, inscribed with familiar exam- 
 ples from the poets, orators, and philosophers, I 
 have shown thee. Nor have I cited misleading pas- 
 sages from Augustine, and, I believe, there is no 
 college in the entire university in which logical 
 disputations are more diligently pursued than in 
 mine. Wherefore, my Maecenas, in the name of the 
 living God, most just and holy, exert thy valor and 
 
54 PETER RAMUS 
 
 vindicate my innocence ()f this foul and horrid charge. 
 Such are the accusations under which I am con- 
 demned, unless thou bearest me aid !' 
 
 " Thereupon, my hearers, I witnessed the indigna- 
 tion of this most noble and virtuous cardinal violently 
 aroused by such an atrocit}\ On the next day, then, 
 he demanded of the president of the parlement that 
 my case be at once brought to trial. . . . They 
 who were present can remember with what true and 
 weighty words the cardinal assailed my accusers. 
 With equal firmness the next day the judge sat in 
 the court for almost three continuous hours and . . . 
 heard the case. At the close he and the parlement 
 decided unanimously that my students should be 
 completely restored to their former pri\dleges, that 
 lectures on philosophy should be given at the regular 
 hours on the days ordinarily set for university 
 sessions, and that in the remaining hours of the 
 regular days I might lecture upon the poets, orators, 
 and other classic authors, instead of upon phi- 
 losophy. And it was just this union of ' eloquence ' 
 and philosophy for which I had been so long con- 
 tending ! . . . 
 
 "Therefore, my Maecenas, by gaining this most 
 righteous verdict, thou hast obtained leisure and 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 55 
 
 peace for my studies, and sincerity and truth for phi- 
 losophy. . . . And when the university of Paris shall 
 come to reahze how vast and infinite a benefit thou 
 hast bestowed, she will hail thee as her Maecenas, 
 and not mine alone. She will compare thee not 
 only to the great cardinals of the ages, but will judge 
 that Charles the Great (Charlemagne), her founder, 
 has miraculously returned in the guise of Charles of 
 Lorraine to mold and complete the crude and 
 inchoate beginnings of his ancient university. Since 
 such is the case, my hearers, in my own name and 
 that of the state, I render most hearty thanks to 
 Charles of Lorraine." 
 
 In an equally poetic way he followed the account 
 of his vindication with a general exposition of his 
 ethical and educational ideas. At the close of the 
 oration he was met with deafening plaudits from the 
 assembly, in which were seated many of his adver- 
 saries. This brilliant inauguration was the fore- 
 runner of a most remarkable career. The utterances 
 of Ramus were no longer confined to the students of 
 a single college, but resounded throughout Paris, and 
 an innumerable body of students not only from all 
 parts of France, but from many other countries of 
 Europe, flocked to hear him. He realized that the 
 
56 PETER RAMUS 
 
 friends who had stood by hun had formed high ex- 
 pectations of his achievements, and never allowed his 
 work to fall below the best of which he was capable. 
 Instead of the ordinary routine method of droning 
 through a commentary upon a given passage, he made 
 a treatment of the author that was at once free and 
 interesting, and gave illustrations and applications 
 that greatly added to the value of his exposition. 
 The material of his lectures on the classics he soon 
 began to publish, and rapidly put out a number of 
 commentaries relating to the works of Cicero, 
 Vergil, and Caesar.^ His interest in philosophy and 
 logic, however, did not flag, and he took advantage of 
 the new liberty given him to show in his lectures on 
 the poets and orators the way in which the principles 
 of logic obtained in any work of the intellect. Hence 
 he revived his old method of joining the study of ' elo- 
 quence ' with that of philosophy. Similarly, when- 
 ever he explained any classical author, he endeavored 
 
 1 M. Tulii Ciceronis de lege agraria contra P. Servilimn Rullmn 
 tribunum plebis orajioncs tres (1552), M. T. Ciceronis in L. Catilinam 
 orationes IIII (1553), P. Virgilii Maronis Bucolica (1555), P. 
 Virgilii Maronis Georgica (1556), M. T. Ciceronis de optimo genere 
 oratorum prcefatio (1556), Ciceronianus (1557), M. T. Ciceronis 
 Jamiliarium epistolariim lihri XVI (1557), Liber de moribus veterum 
 Gallorutn (1559), Liber de Ccesaris Militia (1559). 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 57 
 
 to see what art or science he could teach through this 
 medium. Thus the orations and the treatise On 
 Fate of Cicero served as texts on rhetoric and dialec- 
 tic, the Georgics of Vergil were used as a means 
 of teaching 'physics' or natural science, and the 
 Dream of Scipio in Cicero's Republic for treating 
 astronomy. He felt that he might thus advance 
 the study of the liberal arts and make them more 
 useful. This practical tendency of his teaching 
 caused his opponents to give him the nickname of 
 usuarius, or 'utilitarian.' ^ 
 
 In fact, Ramus planned nothing short of a reform 
 of all the liberal arts, and during this period wrote 
 most of his works upon each of the disciplines in the 
 trivium. In grammar he published his lectures on 
 Priscian and other grammarians under the title of 
 Studies in Grammar." This was not merely a criti- 
 cal treatise, but undertook to establish construc- 
 tive principles. About the same time he put out 
 works upon Latin grammar,^ and in the succeeding 
 
 1 See Turnebi disputatio ad librum Ciceronis De Fato (1556), fol. 
 2 20. If ' pragmatist ' were not so modern, it would render this word 
 most aptly. 
 
 2 S choice GrammaticcB (1559). 
 
 ^ GrammaticcB lihri quattuor (1559) and Rudimenta grammaticcs 
 (1559). 
 
58 PETER RAMUS 
 
 years he wrote treatises upon Greek grammar,' and 
 even a work on the vernacular,^ which ran through 
 many editions. On rhetoric Ramus also produced 
 reform works. The critical treatises on Cicero and 
 Quintilian, which had led to such an uproar,^ he 
 now modified and united under the less aggressive 
 title of Studies in Rhetoric} The more constructive, 
 if no less difficult, task of positively formulating the 
 principles of rhetoric from his point of view he left 
 to his colleague, who published during the early part 
 of this T^QY\odth.Q Lectures ojOmer Talon on Rhetoric} 
 Ramus also continued his works upon dialectic. While 
 he still felt that all the liberal arts were merely applica- 
 tions of this subject, he published separate treatises 
 upon it. First of all, however, there appeared a 
 much improved edition of the Institutions oj Dialectic} 
 The next year was printed his vernacular work on the 
 subject,' which is considered by some^ to be his most 
 
 ^ Grammalica grceca (1560) and Rudimenta grammaticce grceccB 
 (1560). 
 
 2 Gromere (1562), afterward (1567,1572,1587, etc.) Grammairc 
 dc Pierre de la Ramec. 
 
 ' See pp. 42 ff. ^ Schola rhetorical. 
 
 ^ Prcdectiones in A. Talaei rhetoricam, 1554 and 1562. 
 
 *■' See pp. 30 f . 
 
 ' Dialectique (1555). 
 
 * See Cousin, Fragments Philosophiques Modernes, I, p. 14. 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 59 
 
 important contribution to philosophy, and in the two 
 years following he published respectively his final 
 word on logic in two books/ and a modified and much 
 enlarged edition of the Animadversions " in twenty 
 books which he called Studies in Dialectic.^ 
 
 Thus by 1559 the position of Ramus with regard 
 to the trivium, or elementary liberal arts, had been 
 fairly formulated, and he was now at liberty to under- 
 take works on the quadrivium, especially mathematics. 
 In this subject, however, he was one of the path- 
 breakers, as not much had been done up to this time 
 at the University of Paris. He thus had need of 
 instructing himself before attempting to impart his 
 knowledge to others. He had been one of the best 
 pupils of Oronce Finee,'' the first professor of mathe- 
 matics at the University, and while still at the College 
 of Ave Maria, he had produced a translation of the 
 first six books of Euclid, in which he tried to apply 
 logic to the presentation of the subject.^ Eleven 
 years later he had published an elementary arith- 
 metic.^ He now returned to the study of geometry 
 with great ardor. For a time, however, he tells us, 
 
 ^ Dialectic(B libri duo (1556). ^ See p. 10. 
 
 ' ScholcE dialectics (1557). '' See p. 18. 
 
 ^ Eiiclides (1554). Seep. 164. 
 ^ Ariihmeticce libri ires (1555). 
 
60 PETER RAMUS 
 
 he was unable to get beyond the tenth book of Euclid 
 and abandoned the subject in disgust. "But soon," 
 says he, "I was ashamed of stopping so, and bringing 
 myself back to the place where I had gone astray 
 I devoured the tenth book, and continued the study 
 of pyramids, prisms, cubes, spheres, cones, and 
 cylinders. Moreover, once I had clambered over 
 the first crags and learned the elements of Euclid, I 
 read through the Spherics of Theodosius and the 
 Cylindrics of Archimedes. I had already mastered 
 ApoUonius, Serenus, and Pappus, and after a few 
 months I was able to pierce the last mysteries of 
 geometry." ^ From this account it can be realized 
 how difficult was the study of geometry at that time. 
 He who would master it had largely to make his own 
 translation from the very imperfect editions of the 
 Greek mathematicians as he went along. Ramus 
 worked at the subject persistently, both alone and 
 with chosen pupils, and not only made himself one 
 of the leading mathematicians of France in his day, 
 but helped to train a number of distinguished mathe- 
 matical scholars. 
 
 He did not, however, begin to work on the subject 
 in earnest until he had been able to secure more 
 
 * Oratio de profcssione liberalium artium (1563). 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 6 1 
 
 leisure and material. Later he was able to procure 
 copies of the Greek mathematicians from the royal 
 library at Fontainebleau, some of the treasures from 
 Venice and the Vatican through the Italian ambassa- 
 dors, and works from foreign scholars, like Camera- 
 rius and Rheticus of Germany and Ascham of Eng- 
 land. From 1566 on he gave considerable time to 
 mathematics. WhUe he had Forcadel, whom he had 
 nominated for a professorship in the Royal College, 
 teach arithmetic and geometry in French, he himself 
 lectured on the Greek mathematicians, of whom he 
 had obtained copies. He also bought or had copied 
 manuscripts of Archimedes, Proclus, and others, and 
 had several of the young mathematicians translate 
 them into Latin under his direction.^ Within a 
 space of four years he wrote some five or six important 
 works on mathematics in Latin or French.^ 
 
 Just before this, while he was enduring an exile 
 of which we shall shortly hear. Ramus also found 
 time to complete the only one of his treatises that 
 
 ^ Nancel, Epislolce, p. i, 1. 61. 
 
 "^ Actiones duce mathematicce (1566), Preface sur le Proeme des 
 Mathematiques (1566), Prooemium mathematicum (1567), Geotne- 
 tricB libri septem et viginti (1569), and Scholarum mathematicarum 
 libri unus et triginta (1569), are still in existence. 
 
02 FEIER RAMUS 
 
 we have upon Physics, or natural science.^ It was 
 taught in the College of France and elsewhere, and 
 he would gladly have de\oted much of his life to 
 furthering it, had it not been for the persecutions 
 that were now approaching. After his return to 
 Paris the book was sent to press. 
 
 It must not be supposed that the enemies of Ramus 
 were idle during this period of his productiveness or 
 that this reform of the matter and method of the liberal 
 arts was carried on without a struggle. But the con- 
 troversies were of much the same type of guerilla 
 warfare that he had previously endured and had 
 about as little result. A typical instance is his 
 quarrel with the doctors of the Sorbonne over pro- 
 nunciation. The professors of the College of France 
 tried to bring back the original pronunciation of 
 Latin in place of the erroneous and slipshod methods 
 into which the university colleges had degenerated. 
 The chief point of discussion was the pronunciation of 
 qu, from which combination the Sorbonists were wont 
 to omit the u in speaking. For example, they pro- 
 nounced the Latin words as kiskis, kankam, kaiitus, 
 and kalis instead of giving the initial value of kw. 
 Similarly, h in mihi was pronounced gutturally as ch. 
 * Scholarum physicarum libri octo (1565). 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 63 
 
 111 the coJitrovcrsy vvliicli followed, it is even baid ^ 
 that one of the reformers was summoned before 
 parlement and prosecuted for grammatical 'heresy/ 
 and, had it not been for Ramus and his other col- 
 leagues, who attended the trial and gave the judges 
 to understand that grammar was out of their juris- 
 diction, it might have fared badly with the luckless 
 professor. The contest over the reforms of Ramus 
 in rhetoric was also continued by Galland, Perion,- 
 and their sympathizers. 
 
 But the most rabid opposition was raised to tlic 
 positions of our reformer on logic. Here Car- 
 pentarius, jealous and thirsting for revenge after 
 his defeat in 1551,^ was most persistent and 
 bitter. He did not dare attack Ramus as 
 lecturer in the Royal College, but the latter's 
 position in the College of Presles enabled him to 
 renew all his virulent methods. He again insisted 
 
 1 Crevier {Hist, de I'Univ. dc Paris, 1. X, § 2) claims thai the 
 whole story of prosecution for heresy in grammar is very unlikel>', 
 although one would hesitate on that account to impeach wholesale, 
 as he does, all the testimony offered by the Ramists. The incident 
 is narrated by Ramus himself {Schol. gram., 1. II) and confirmed by 
 Zwinger {Theatrum humance vitee, Vol. IV, 1. i, p. hoc), and, as 
 Waddington intimates (pp. 87 f.), there were few lengths to which 
 the theologians of the day would not go. 
 
 * See pp. 32 ff. and 43 ff. * See pp. 45 ff. 
 
64 PETER RAMUS 
 
 that the reformer was breaking the university 
 statutes when he taught Aristotle by going freely 
 from idea to idea rather than by the traditional word- 
 for-word method, and he opposed more vigorously 
 than before the union of the study of ' eloquence ' 
 with that of philosophy. Happily, however, the parle- 
 ment held to its previous decision to let Ramus teach 
 as he wished on some two hundred days of the year 
 and at odd hours on other days.^ Thereupon, 
 Carpentarius, under the pretext of a commentary 
 on the Institutions of Ramus,^ let loose the vials of 
 his wrath. In this pamphlet he repeats all the pet 
 epithets with which he had previously assailed him. 
 Ramus is called 'slanderer,' 'plagiarist,' 'sophist,' 
 'comedian,' 'skeptic,' and 'corrupter of youth.' He 
 brutally recalls the verdict of the king a dozen 
 years before,^ and gets a malicious pleasure out of 
 the fact that Ramus was constantly modifying his 
 statements about dialectic.^ He mocks the reform- 
 er's pretensions to dignity and jests about his long 
 beard, declaring that without such artificial aid he 
 himself had been able to attain to the rectorship. 
 
 ^ See p. 46. 
 
 ^ Jacobi Car pent arii Animadversiones in libros tres Dialectkanim 
 institutionuni Petri Rami (1555). 
 
 s See pp. 34 ff. * See footnote 3, p. 65. 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 65 
 
 Ramus did not consider this mountebank worthy 
 of a reply, but the case seemed different when criti- 
 cism was offered by Adrien Turnebus. The latter 
 was a learned professor and a man of character 
 and social position, but he had been piqued because 
 the loss occasioned by the death of his predecessor 
 in the College of France had in a eulogy^ by Ramus 
 been declared to be quite irreparable. In editing the 
 De Fato of Cicero, Turnebus embraced the oppor- 
 tunity for venting his displeasure upon Ramus, who 
 had commented upon the same work.^ In this work 
 Turnebus criticizes the modifications which Ramus 
 made in his dialectic works as his knowledge broad- 
 ened.^ He accuses him of inconsistency and instabil- 
 ity, and asks : "Which is your genuine position in so 
 many shifting editions ? Do you yourself know what 
 
 1 The predecessor of Turnebus in the lectureship was Jacques 
 Tousan, who had been one of the former teachers of Ramus, and 
 had given him much encouragement in his ideas on logic. See 
 preface to his Platonis Epistolce, and Collectan. prcefat., pp. 99 f. 
 
 - The title of the book shows his animus : Ad. Turnebi disputatio 
 ad libruin Ciceronis de fato, adversus quemdam qui non solum 
 logicus esse, verum etiam dialecticus haberi vult (1556). 
 
 ^ While Ramus did not answer this common criticism at the 
 time, he had the year before said in the preface to his Dialectique : 
 "But truly this inconsistency is praised as a real consistency not 
 only by Horace and Apelles, but also by philosophers, especially 
 Aristotle, who teaches us that philosophy ought, for the sake of 
 
66 PETER RAMUS 
 
 you wish ? " And again he declares : ^ ' It is a poor way 
 to conceal your ignorance by unceasingly slandering 
 the great authors. You have only gained thereby a 
 sad reputation for ignorance, impudence, and vanity." 
 Ramus felt that an adverse opinion from such a 
 source must be met, and while he could not openly 
 break his custom of keeping silent under criticism, 
 without loss of time he issued under the name of 
 Talon a dignified and courteous reply. ^ He made 
 it very clear that he did not rank Turnebus with 
 Carpentarius, and rebuked him mildly for his attack. 
 Turnebus in turn replied through a friend, and the 
 quarrel stopped with mutual respect, if not agree- 
 ment, and before long the two scholars became firm 
 friends. 
 
 Thus Ramus escaped practically unscathed from 
 the various attacks upon his reforms, and, as the 
 years passed, his reputation as an educator grew 
 constantly greater. During this period of prosperity, 
 too, he was able to demonstrate his gifts as an orator 
 
 truth, to criticize not only all others, but also itself. Moreover, 
 this consistency, accused of being inconsistency, is ordained of 
 God and of Nature, as a difficult and slippery ascent, by walking 
 up which we discover and define the only road to the knowledge 
 of science and learning." 
 
 M. TalcBi Admonitio ad A. 1' iinidrnm (1556). 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 67 
 
 and diplomat. He was chosen by the university to 
 represent it before the king upon various occasions. 
 In 1557, especially, he was greatly commended for 
 pleading the cause of the university under very 
 important circumstances. A quarrel of long stand- 
 ing^ between students of the university and the monks 
 of St. Germain over the possession of the 'student 
 fields' (Pre-aux-clercs) had broken out again with 
 much violence and rioting.^ While the students 
 were mostly to blame for stirring up the old dispute, 
 they were not the first to shed blood. Yet they 
 alone suffered for the disturbance. The parlement 
 condemned one student to be hanged and burnt, 
 
 1 For a former (1548) outbreak, during which the students 
 devastated the abbey gardens and broke the windows of the mon- 
 astery with stones, see Du Boulay, Hist, de VUniv. de Paris, t. VI, 
 pp. 406 fif . While Ramus apparently tried on this occasion to pacify 
 the students by haranguing them, he was ever afterward, on the 
 strength of his speech, accused by his enemies of further inciting 
 the students. E.g. Felibien, Hist, de VAbhaye royal de Saint Ger- 
 main-des-Pres, p. 185, and Hist, de la ville de Paris, t. II, pp. 102- 
 105 ff. But Du Boulay and De Thou do not even mention Ramus 
 in the affair. In fact, the evidence against Ramus seems to come 
 from a prejudiced source, Jacques du Breul, who was a member 
 of the order and declares he was present at the riot. See Thedtre 
 des antiquitez de Paris (161 2), 1, II, pp. 385 f. 
 
 2 Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, pp. 491 ff.; Crevier, Hist, de VUniv. 
 de Paris, t. VI, 29 ff. ; Felibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, t. II, 
 pp. 125 ff. 
 
68 PETER RAMUS 
 
 and others, who had been arrested, seemed to be 
 doomed. The same tribunal ordered that the gates 
 of the university colleges be closed at six every 
 evening, the students disarmed, and all public 
 lectures suspended. Moreover, the king, hearing 
 of the riot and being exceedingly wroth, confiscated 
 the fields, required all foreign students to leave the 
 kingdom within a fortnight, and expelled the 'externs,' 
 or students living at Paris with their parents, from 
 the university. In dismay the faculties sent a 
 delegation to the king, to secure some modification 
 of the judgment. Ramus was a member of this 
 commission, and, through his eloquence and his 
 influence with the Cardinal of Lorraine, its most 
 influential member, met with great success. Upon 
 the promise of reform, the king was at length per- 
 suaded, quite contrary to all expectations, to revoke 
 the measures against the university, reprieve the 
 condemned students, restore the public lectures, 
 countermand the banishment of the foreign students, 
 and order parlement to stop its prosecutions. The 
 delegates were overwhelmed with praise, especially 
 Ramus, when by request he gave in a public address 
 an account of the whole affair. But the king was 
 also inclined to insure the fulfillment of the promised 
 
PROFESSOR IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE 69 
 
 academic reforms, and insisted upon LJic selection 
 of a special committee of seven to investigate and 
 propose what would be most necessary and useful 
 for the improvement of the institution. Ramus was 
 appointed by the faculty of arts, together with his 
 old opponent, Carpentarius, and the report that 
 he offered later ^ was most important in its effects 
 upon the University of Paris in particular. - 
 
 Another diplomatic mission of Ramus that was of 
 great service to education was his securing the arrears 
 in salary due the professors in the College of France. 
 During the one-year reign of Francis II and the first 
 three years of Charles IX's reign, the Guises were 
 in complete control of the government,' and the 
 finances were notoriously mismanaged . For two years 
 the professors of the Royal College failed to receive 
 their stipends, although they continued conscien- 
 tiously to fulfill their duties, and in 1561 Ramus was 
 sent to petition the king. He was also commissioned 
 to solicit a confirmation and renewal of the privileges 
 for the university, as had to be done at the beginning 
 of each reign. Although his patron, the Cardinal 
 
 ' See pp. 78 flf. 
 
 ■^ Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, pp. 489 and 517 f. ; F61ibien, op. cit., 
 t. II, pp. 1057 f. 
 » See pp. 1 1 ff . 
 
70 PETER RAMUS 
 
 of Guise, was no longer at the court to intercede 
 for him, the Prince of Conde, who was in favor with 
 the queen-mother/ and other persons of prominence 
 supported his claim and enabled him to bring back a 
 goodly portion of the accrued salaries and all the 
 former charters and privileges of the university, 
 bound in a single volume. His zeal and tact aroused 
 great enthusiasm in the academic circles, and an ac- 
 count of his services to the university was inscribed 
 at the end of the manuscript of privileges. 
 
 Hence by 1561 nearly all the old adversaries of 
 Ramus, including even the fanatical Galland and the 
 offended Turnebus, had been conquered through his 
 persistence and evident sincerity. Esteem succeeded 
 hostility with every one save Carpentarius. The op- 
 position of that unprincipled leader was now increased 
 through envy, for Ramus had come into high favor 
 with king, parlement, and university. 
 
 1 See pp. II ff. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 Conversion, Persecution, and Death 
 
 Much of the prestige that Ramus had obtained 
 would seem to have been due to the friendship of the 
 Guises, who were so influential in church and state. 
 It now remains for us to see the effect upon his career 
 of becoming a Protestant and so sacrificing their 
 friendship. The Duke of Guise and his brother, the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine, represented the extreme Catho- 
 lic party, and Ramus, while endeavoring to dethrone 
 Aristotle, had remained a member of the church in 
 good standing. Until 1561 he maintained in his own 
 life all the observances of a zealous Catholic. He 
 went to mass every morning at six, and, under 
 penalty of a severe reprimand, required the same 
 practice of the students in the College of Presles.^ 
 He was attached to Mother Church by bonds of 
 unusual emotion and material interest, but the pro- 
 cess of his conversion, while slow, was inevitable. He 
 was too clear-headed not to have misgivings as to 
 the efficacy of the ritual and dominant theology of 
 * Nancel, op. cit., pp. 2^ I., 53, 70. 
 71 
 
72 PETER RAMUS 
 
 the church of the times, and his personal and pro- 
 fessional associations all tended to draw him into the 
 Protestant camp. The medieval Aristotle, whom 
 he had vigorously assailed, was still protected by 
 the church, and the two were so thoroughly identified 
 as to be almost indistinguishable. Those who de- 
 parted from the traditional views of the Greek phi- 
 losopher were reputed to be heretics,^ and it could 
 not be denied that such reformers as Luther, Zwingli, 
 and Calvin had first dreamed of suppressing Aris- 
 totle.^ Moreover, the clergy were generally very 
 ignorant, and an intellectual man was bound to find 
 himself associated, to a great extent, with the Hugue- 
 nots, who at the time had nearly a monopoly of learn- 
 ing. A majority of the professors at the College 
 of France were actually Protestants or suspected of 
 being such, and many of the patrons and friends 
 of Ramus were more or less under the influence of 
 the new religion.^ A large number of his pupils 
 
 ' Rapin, Reflexions siir V usage de la philosophie, § V'l. 
 
 - Two of the propositions of Luther condemned in 1521 by the 
 faculty of theology at Paris related definitely to Aristotelianism. 
 See also pp. 5 IT. 
 
 •* Tt is said that even the Cardinal of Lorraine sympathized 
 secretly with the aims of Protestantism, and his attitude at tla* 
 Colloriuy of Poissy points tliat way. Jean de Montluc, bislioi) 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 73 
 
 at the College of Presles, too, were of Huguenot 
 parentage, or became converted through the influ- 
 ence of the school. 
 
 Ramus himself was early suspected ^ of Calvinistic 
 leanings. Ascham even wrote to Sturm ^ in 1552 
 that one of the pupils of Ramus had stated that 
 while his master's convictions were secretly Protes- 
 tant, he still hesitated to make an open confession 
 of his faith. But for nearly a decade longer Ramus 
 protested his attachment to the church, and insisted 
 that he had attacked Aristotle simply in the name of 
 the Gospel, on the ground that his Ethics was hereti- 
 cal and pagan. '^ The immediate cause of his conver- 
 sion was the Colloquy of Poissy. This conference 
 took place in September, 1561, with the idea of 
 bringing out a discussion of the points of difference 
 between Catholics and Protestants and so effecting 
 some degree of toleration between the two parties, 
 but it resulted only in increasing the bitterness.* 
 Strangely enough, it was not the speech of Theodore 
 
 of Valence, was also sympathetically inclined, and frequently 
 showed himself a good friend to the Protestants. 
 
 ^ Nancel, op. cit., pp. ;i^ and 63. 
 
 -Letters of Ascham (Oxford, 1703), Book I, Letter 9. 
 
 ' Du Verdier, Bihliotheque franqaise, article on Aristotle. 
 
 * See p. 74. 
 
74 PETER RAMUS 
 
 Beza,' the able exponent of Calvinism, that convinced 
 Ramus, but the argument made in reply by the Car- 
 dinal of Lorraine. That prelate publicly admitted all 
 the abuses of the church, the vices of the clergy, and 
 the superiority of the primitive church to that of 
 the day, but did not grant the obvious conclusion. - 
 Ramus and others felt it forced upon them.^ A 
 letter written by Ramus to his former patron some 
 nine years later states definitely how the address 
 affected him. He says in part : — 
 
 "It is not through myself, it is through your favor 
 (the greatest of all the many you have heaped upon 
 me) that I have come to understand the precious 
 truth, so well presented in your discourse at the 
 Colloquy of Poissy : namely, that of the fifteen cen- 
 turies which have passed since the advent of Christ, 
 the first was truly the 'golden age,' and that, in pro- 
 portion as it has been departed from, all ages which 
 have followed have been more vicious and corrupt. 
 Hence, having to choose between these different ages 
 
 ^ See p. lo. 
 
 ' Guillemin, Le Cardinal de Lorraine, p. 487. 
 
 ^ The colloquy is now believed to have greatly increased the 
 number of Huguenots. See Crevier, 0^. cil., t. VI, p. 127; Pueux, 
 Hisi. de la Reformation Franqaise, Book IX, Chaps. VIII-XIII. 
 Among the converts was also Caraccioli, bishop of Troyes. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 
 
 /o 
 
 of Christianity, I attached myself to the 'golden 
 age,' and since that time I have never ceased to read 
 the best writings of theology. I have put myself in 
 harmony and communication with the theologians 
 themselves as far as I could ; and have further, for 
 my own edification, written Commentaries upon the 
 chief points of religion." ^ 
 
 Thus, having once started on the new line of 
 thought. Ramus went the full way. The commen- 
 taries mentioned above were the result of his attempt 
 to apply dialectic to theology, as he had to all the 
 other sciences of the day, but they were not completed 
 until after his contact with the reformed theologians 
 in Switzerland, and were published after his death. 
 He began to absent himself from mass and the other 
 usages of the church, and even quietly protested 
 against them. To an intimate friend he declared 
 that "two things have been especially misunder- 
 stood and distorted by all Christians of latter days, — 
 to wit, the sacrament of the Holy Supper, and the 
 second commandment in the law, which forbids all 
 worship of images ; so much so that, in these two 
 respects, under the pretext of piety, we have fallen 
 more and more into an execrable idolatry." ^ Of 
 
 1 Collect, prcef., pp. 257 f. ^ Banosius, op. cit., p. 25. 
 
76 PETER RAMUS 
 
 course no sentiment could be more clearly Protestant 
 than this, and we cannot be surprised to find that 
 Ramus now, while not openly out of communion with 
 the church, showed great toleration, if not marked 
 favor, to all Huguenots among his students. It 
 seems hardly possible that he ever went to Protestant 
 services, much less that he took his students there, 
 as did some professors, but it is more than likely that 
 he was among those intended to be reprimanded by 
 the rector in his address of November 30, 1561/ 
 And it is certain that the students of the College of 
 Presles were generally becoming reformed and de- 
 serting the Catholic observances. A pupil of Ramus 
 tells us that at the Feast of the Passover in 1562 he 
 and his master were the only two communicants in 
 the chapel, except for one visitor, who had strayed in.^ 
 The Reformation, however, had grown to such 
 l)roportions that the queen-mother, upon the advice 
 of the fair-minded chancellor of the kingdom, Michel 
 de I'Hospital, felt obliged to issue the Edict of Tol- 
 eration.'* While this did not go the full distance and 
 allow the Protestants to worship in the cities or in 
 
 ' See the account of Crevier {op. ciL, t. VI, p. 126) and of Dii 
 Boulay {op. ciL, p. 545)- 
 
 ' Nancel, op. cit., p. 72. ' See p. 12. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 77 
 
 the evening, it was hailed with great deliglit on the 
 part of the Huguenots and with much indignation and 
 opposition from the CathoHcs. The students of the 
 College of Presles celebrated the event by bursting 
 into the chapel and tearing down the images and 
 statues. Ramus, of course, had little to do with such 
 a desecration, but he received the full blame. His 
 opponents incited the populace against him/ and 
 denounced him to the university authorities as an 
 iconoclast, but an investigation by the rector failed 
 to reveal the evidence desired against him.^ On the 
 other hand, the rector and a majority of the princi- 
 pals of the university colleges made a violent demon- 
 stration against the decree, and exhausted every 
 expedient to prevent the parlement from registering 
 it.^ When, after two months of delay,* the parle- 
 ment did finally register the obnoxious edict, all the 
 smoldering wrath of the Guise party burst into 
 flame.^ The Duke of Guise declared openly that 
 "his sword would never be sheathed until he com- 
 
 1 Nancei, op. cit., p. 7:. 
 
 ' Banosius, op. cit., p. 24 ; Nancei, op. cit., p. 71 ; and Du Boulay, 
 op. cit., t. VI, p. 54Q. 
 
 ^ Du Boulay, op. cit., pp. 54Q f. ; Genebrard, Chronographie, 
 p. 746. 
 
 ♦ Crevier, op. cit., t. VI, p. 129. * See pp. 11 ff. 
 
78 PETER RAMUS 
 
 pelled every Frenchman to become a Catholic or 
 leave the realm." ^ 
 
 By this time Ramus must have completely sacri- 
 ficed all his influence with the Guises. As will be 
 seen later, his warm patron, the Cardinal of Lor- 
 raine, had completely turned against him. While 
 himself inclined toward the position of the Protes- 
 tants, statecraft forced him to become their most 
 bitter opponent. Meanwhile, despite these dis- 
 turbed conditions. Ramus continued to produce his 
 works on the liberal arts,^ and in this very year of 
 conflict (1562), as a member of the committee to 
 which he had been chosen five years previously, he 
 presented his report upon academic reform to the 
 king and queen-mother. This Advice on the Reforma- 
 tion of the University of Paris^ boldly attributes many 
 of the abuses that had sprung up to the unlimited 
 number of professors. ''For, instead of a given 
 
 1 Pasquier, Lettres, 1. IV, 10. 2 See p. 120. 
 
 3 Advertissements sur la reformation de Vuniversite de Paris au 
 roy, or, in the Latin edition, Procemium reformandce Parisiensis 
 academics ad regem, was published anonymously, but, coming 
 from the press of Andre Wechel, his coreligionist and regular 
 publisher, its origin was evident, especially as, from internal evi- 
 dence, the author was clearly a Protestant, a professor of philosophy, 
 a royal lecturer, and a member of the commission of investigation. 
 See Archives Curieuses de VHistoire de France, t. 5, pp. 1 15-163. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 79 
 
 number of doctors for teaching, an infinity of men 
 have been raised up, who, provided they have ac- 
 quired the name and degree of master in the faculty 
 of which they make profession, whether ignorant or 
 learned, without other selection, have undertaken to 
 make a trade of teaching philosophy, medicine, juris- 
 prudence, or theology. Hence has arisen the storm 
 which has despoiled all our fields. ' ' ^ But while the in- 
 structors have gradually multiplied, the number 
 of students has remained practically the same, and 
 the result has been a great increase in the fees for tui- 
 tion and degrees. Thus, for philosophy, the expense 
 of the pupils, which was first fixed by ordinance and 
 statute at four to six ecus ^ at the most, had finally 
 been raised to fifty or fifty-six livres? Later, he 
 shows that the professional faculties have become 
 even more disproportionate. The faculty of law, 
 in obedience to the statute of 1534, is content with 
 twenty-eight ecus per student, but " the faculties of 
 medicine and theology, in comparison with that of 
 
 ^ Advertissements, p. 8. 
 
 2 The ecu mentioned must have been the ecu d'or, as the silver 
 coin of that name was not introduced until 1642, and the franc 
 d' argent, often called ecu, was not authorized until 1575. The gold 
 piece was worth a little more than fifty sols, or two and one half 
 livres, and, judged by the weight and fineness of the American 
 
8o PETER RAMUS 
 
 philosophy, which has only quadrupled its former 
 revenue, have increased their fees, not in arithmetical 
 proportion, which would have been beneath their 
 dignity, but in geometrical proportion.'^ ^ The pro- 
 fessors of medicine, instead of twenty-eight ecus, 
 now ask eight hundred and eighty livres, without 
 counting the presents to apothecaries and barbers, 
 their former pupils,' while the theologians demand 
 of their unfortunate students more than one thousand 
 livres. This large sum is distributed from the begin- 
 ning of the course under some thirty items, which in- 
 clude fees for the professors, priors, porters, and presi- 
 dent, for the banquets and suppers of the teachers, 
 president, classmates, and examiners ; and for the 
 various grades of examination, theses, seals, degrees, 
 sermons, hoods, and perquisites. Moreover, even 
 the honor of being proclaimed first at the master's 
 examination can be bought for ahighprice.^ With 
 regard to these unnecessary expenses. Ramus asks : — 
 "Of what use are so many gloves, caps, banquets, 
 
 dollar, worth something over two dollars. Hence the fees in this 
 case were raised approximately from $8 or $12 to $40 or $44.80; 
 i.e. they were practically quadrupled. Of course the purchasing 
 value was much greater than it would be for the same sums to-day. 
 
 1 Op. cit., p. 18. 2 Qp ^.ji^ p 24. 
 
 ^ Op. cit., pp. 27 fif. Cf. also pp. II, 22, and 59 for the expenses 
 of the other degrees. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 8 1 
 
 to prove the diligence and competency of the stu- 
 dents ? Where do so many purses go, and to what use 
 are they converted ? They are partly distributed to 
 the procurers, receivers, singers, and priests who say 
 mass and solemn vespers ; a good part of this money 
 is even spent on candles for the Day of Purification. 
 In short, the money and the receipt of the degree 
 are administered in such a fashion that those who do 
 the least service for the students receive the most 
 spoils from them. By an ordinance then, sire, abol- 
 ish that numerous troop of professors, select worthy 
 and competent men as lecturers, remove those ex- 
 penses and charges, not only the unnecessary, but 
 even the former fees, for it is an unworthy thing that 
 the road to knowledge should be closed and for- 
 bidden to the poor, no matter how learned and well 
 educated they may be, and it cannot at present be 
 otherwise, because of the expenses and necessary 
 charges. Sire, but say the word. Numerous con- 
 vents, monasteries, colleges, and canonries of the city 
 of Paris will think themselves happy and greatly 
 honored to furnish these expenses and will easily 
 and promptly do so, if only you command them. 
 Bring it to pass that the only legitimate expenditures 
 for the scholar shall be those of his living, dress, 
 
82 PETER RAMUS 
 
 books, work, vigils, and the pursuit of letters for the 
 greater part of his life." ^ 
 
 He gives a further description of the abuses. The 
 infinitude of masters not only has engendered in- 
 finite expense, but has produced neglect in the matter 
 and method of instruction. The faculty of arts is 
 perhaps the least reprehensible in this direction, but 
 the abandonment of the public lectures in the 
 Rue du Fouarre ^ and the substitution of inferior 
 private instruction by each college has been unfor- 
 tunate. It is especially to be regretted that the 
 teachers of philosophy use the questioning method in 
 Aristotle and require nothing in the way of real 
 practice in the use of logic. The grammarians and 
 rhetoricians, however, have set them an example, as 
 they have come to discuss the rules but little, and 
 train their pupils through reading and imitating 
 good authors.^ The situation is still worse in the pro- 
 fessional faculties. In the faculty of law, only canon 
 law is taught, and the civil law is entirely neglected. 
 The professors of medicine and theology are even too 
 lazy to do anything more than preside at the presen- 
 tation of theses or at public debates, and out of their 
 
 1 Op. cit., pp. 13 ff. Cf. pp. 25, 26, 34, etc. 
 
 2 See pp. 13 ff. " Op. cit., pp. 35 ff. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH St, 
 
 enormous salaries pay a few eacs to any bachelor 
 or newly made master that they can get to do their 
 work for them. For the same reason, in medicine the 
 practical exercises in searching after and analyzing 
 herbs and simples, in experimenting with their effects 
 upon the body, and in discussing symptoms and reme- 
 dies are totally neglected; and the theologians are 
 likewise too lazy to be anything but blissfully igno- 
 rant of the Scriptures.^ 
 
 The remedy of Ramus for both this exorbitant 
 cost and this inferiority of university training is 
 exceedingly simple, but apparently very revolution- 
 ary. He proposes that the king appoint a small 
 number of public professors, who shall be paid by the 
 state, and teach the various branches of philosophy, 
 law, medicine, and theolog}^, and lay aside all dispu- 
 tations and barren argumentations. Thus he would 
 have strong, regular, and gratuitous instruction given 
 in all the faculties. Specifically, he would establish 
 in the faculty of arts a chair in mathematics and add 
 work in ' physics ' ; in the faculty of law, instruction in 
 civil law ; in the faculty of medicine, chairs of botany, 
 anatomy, and pharmacy, and the genuine practice 
 of medicine under the supervision of the professors; 
 
 * Op. cit., pp. 6i and 82. 
 
84 PETER RAMUS 
 
 and finally, in theology, besides the regular lectures, 
 he would give the students a training in the study 
 of the Bible and the interpretation of both testaments 
 in their original languages. Further, he suggests that 
 a line of demarcation be drawn between these higher 
 subjects and the lower work in grammar, rhetoric, 
 and dialectic, and that the latter studies be relegated 
 to the colleges, which, after the establishment of 
 public chairs, would otherwise be without a function. 
 These suggestions were badly received at the time 
 Ramus offered them, but they were largely carried 
 out in the succeeding reigns of Henry III and Henry 
 IV. In the suggested distinction between secondary 
 and superior instruction, however, he anticipated a 
 movement that was not realized until after the 
 French Revolution. 
 
 Throughout this treatise on academic reform the 
 attitude of Ramus toward the theologians and the 
 clergy, together with his insistence upon a purified 
 Bible and the careful study of the Scriptures, shows 
 how much further he had progressed in Calvinism. 
 In every reform suggested he now appears in spirit 
 to be a zealous Protestant. His religious practices 
 reveal a similar change. This is seen in the character 
 of the worship in his college chapel. He here modi- 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION. AND DEATH 85 
 
 iiC(i Llic nature of the sermons, abolisJied services lor 
 the dead and prayers to the saints, and followed in 
 general a service very different from the orthodox 
 one/ This afforded his enemies a hold upon him 
 that they had never been able to secure through his 
 heresies in philosophy and rhetoric. 
 
 Meanwhile, the bitterness between Catholic and 
 Huguenot had been increasing. Owing to the politi- 
 cal ambitions of the Guises on the one hand and the 
 ' Huguenots of State ' on the other, the chancellor of 
 the realm had been unable to bring about the peace 
 and harmony for which he had striven. The massacre 
 at Vassy occurred (1562), and became the signal for 
 the outbreak of the first of the civil wars.^ The out- 
 raged Huguenots, despairing of justice, flew to arms, 
 and France was deluged with blood. In July of this 
 year the war governor of Paris banished all Calvinists 
 from the city, and Ramus was forced to flee. He left 
 the administration of the College of Presles to one of 
 his professors, but the absent principal was declared 
 a traitor, and "his office was turned over to a more 
 orthodox, if somewhat ignorant, incumbent.^ Safe 
 
 1 Nancel, op. cil., pp. 71 f. * See p. 12. 
 
 ^ See Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, p. 659 ; Felibien, Histoire de la 
 ville de Paris, t. II, p. 1084. 
 
86 PETER RAMUS 
 
 conduct was, however, assured Ramus by the king 
 and queen-mother, and he found asylum in the royal 
 palace at Fontainebleau.^ Amid the beautiful sur- 
 roundings of this place and the treasures of the royal 
 library, he forgot everything except his studies, until 
 enemies discovered his whereabouts. Then he es- 
 caped death at their hands only by fleeing again, and 
 for a time was pursued from pillar to post. Finally, 
 in March of the next year (1563), the peace of 
 Amboise enabled him to enter Paris again, and live in 
 quiet for a few years. 
 
 Upon his return Ramus without difficulty got 
 back his principalship at Presles and his chair in the 
 Royal College. At the beginning of the academic 
 year he delivered his famous address upon the twelve 
 years of his work as a professor in the College of 
 France.^ In it he tells of his intention to gather up 
 the threads of his writing once more and indulges the 
 vain hope that war will never again disturb the liberal 
 arts, 'the daughters of Peace.' During the next few 
 years he published his works on physics and mathe- 
 matics already mentioned ^ and completed a work 
 
 ' Freigius, op. cit., pp. 26 ff. ; Ramus himself in his Oratio de sua 
 professione also furnishes us with full details of his stay here. 
 ^ Oratio de sua professione liber alium artium (1563). 
 ^ See pp. 61 f. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 87 
 
 upon the metaphysics^ of Aristotle. But the theologi- 
 cal and medical faculties could not forget his address 
 upon the reform of the university, and were on the 
 lookout to catch him upon the hip. More implacable 
 than any other was his inveterate enemy, Carpen- 
 tarius, who constantly hounded him with pamphlets. 
 To that blatant individual Ramus, as usual, paid no 
 attention, but his distinguished pupil Arnaud d'Ossat, 
 afterward a cardinal, did reply with a strong defense of 
 the dialectic of his master,- which Carpentarius an- 
 swered only with a storm of abuse. Moreover, the 
 Jesuits,^ who had been vainly endeavoring to have 
 their College of Clermont recognized by the univer- 
 sity, had at length found a complaisant rector ^ 
 who was willing to issue the 'letters of scholarity.' ^ 
 Ramus was among those who were active in their 
 opposition to the recognition of this order, and in the 
 suit before the parlement that resulted, he was one of 
 the two advocates chosen to oppose them. But the 
 
 ^ Scholarum metaphysicarum libri quattuordecim in totidcm 
 metaphysicos lihros Aristotelis (1565). 
 
 - Expositio Arnaldi Ossati in disputationem Jacobi Carpentarii 
 de methodo (1564). 
 
 * See p. 3. 
 
 ^ Julien de Saint Germain (1564). 
 
 * Crevier, op. cit., t. VI, pp. 165 f. 
 
88 PETER RAMUS 
 
 parlement was afraid of the Guises, who alhed them- 
 selves with the cause of the Jesuits/ and yielded to 
 pressure. This brought Ramus further enemies, 
 whereas Carpentarius, who had toadied to these 
 powerful foes during the contest, won over thereafter 
 the Cardinal of Lorraine as his 'Maecenas.' 
 
 A more formidable controversy for Ramus was 
 occasioned by the seating of Carpentarius in a chair 
 of mathematics at tlic College of France, although 
 he was quite ignorant of the subject. The professor- 
 ship had through politics been given in the first place 
 to Dampestre Cosel, a mediocre mathematician 
 from Sicily, who could speak neither Latin nor 
 French, but upon the request of Ramus and his other 
 colleagues that he be examined, this incumbent un- 
 dertook to sell the position to Carpentarius. This 
 was an unheard of proposition, but was probably sug- 
 gested by the Cardinal of Lorraine and connived at 
 by the court.- Although ignorant both of Euchd 
 and of the language in which that author wrote, 
 Carpentarius was appointed in P^ebruary, 1566, and 
 refused to submit to the examination which the king 
 had established by edict. When the case was brought 
 
 1 Du Boiday, op. cii., I. VI, p. 521. 
 
 ' See Or alio initio stuz projessionis habita (1566), fol. 7 v. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 89 
 
 before the parlement, the professor-elect admitted his 
 ignorance, but declared there were other subjects upon 
 which he could temporarily lecture and that he could 
 become posted on mathematics 'within three days.' ^ 
 He further pleaded his service to the university, 
 Catholicism, and the Aristotelian philosophy so effec- 
 tively that the parlement provisionally confirmed 
 the appointment and gave him three months within 
 which to prepare himself to teach mathematics.^ 
 But even these terms were not favorable enough for 
 Carpentarius. Accordingly he induced the corrupt 
 recorder to change the decree of parlement so that it 
 would read that he should begin the study of Euclid 
 ivithin three months and set no limit to the time when 
 he should be prepared to lecture, and that, instead of 
 teaching mathematics and philosophy, he should 
 teach mathematics or philosophy. As a result, 
 Carpentarius began by lecturing on Aristotle's De 
 Coelo and then turned to the Commentaries on Plato 
 by Alcinous, and never touched mathematics. He 
 further presumed to demand a fee from his students, 
 a proceeding quite contrary to the spirit of the College 
 
 1 Schol. Math., I. I, p. 21. 
 
 ^ Collect, prcefat., p. 544 ; Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, pp. 650 ff. ; 
 Schol. Math., 1. II, p. 63. 
 
90 PETER RAMUS 
 
 of France and hitherto unknown in the history of the 
 institution. This last step was too much for Ramus 
 to endure, and he straightway addressed a Remon- 
 strance to the Privy Council} 
 
 The fear of the Guises, however, was too strong to 
 permit any appeal to be effective, and Ramus, for 
 all his pains, succeeded only in changing the envy of 
 his rival to a mortal hatred. The spite of Carpenta- 
 rius soon showed itself in a series of libels and accu- 
 sations against Ramus,^ which grew so scurrilous 
 and serious that the reformer was forced to have his 
 defamer prosecuted and forced to retract.^ There- 
 upon Carpentarius endeavored to have him mobbed or 
 assassinated, but, thanks to the courage and presence 
 of mind of Ramus, these attempts also failed. 
 
 About this time (September, 1567) the Guises had 
 succeeded in fanning another civil war into flames. 
 Ramus escaped the massacre that ensued by fleeing 
 to the camp of the Protestants at St. Denis, and 
 while not taking part, he was a spectator at the in- 
 
 ^ Remonstrance au conseil prive (1567). The most important 
 portions of this are quoted by Waddington, pp. 411-417. It 
 gives a good account of the details that have been outHned above. 
 
 ^ See Jacobi Carpentarii admonitio ad Thessalum (Paris, 1567); 
 /. Aurati Poemalia, I. IV, pp. 275 ff. 
 
 3 Nancel, p. 63. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH QI 
 
 decisive battle that took place there. He did, how- 
 ever, render a conspicuous service to the Protes- 
 tants through his eloquence in inducing the Ger- 
 man troopers who had been summoned to the aid of 
 Conde and Coligny to continue to serve for less 
 than one third the sum they had been promised.^ 
 Soon after this the Peace of 1568 enabled Ramus to 
 reenter Paris and take up his duties once more, but 
 he was scarcely settled before he perceived another 
 storm brewing. He thereupon persuaded the king to 
 grant him leave of absence to visit the chief universi- 
 ties of Germany and Switzerland, as he had long hoped 
 to do. Before leaving, however, he drew up his will 
 and patriotically left the bulk of his fortune to found 
 a chair of mathematics at the College of France.^ 
 He then wrote a most eloquent Farewell Letter to the 
 University of Paris.^ 
 
 The travels of Ramus during the next two years 
 (1568-15 70) were nominally a species of thinly dis- 
 guised expatriation, but they soon took on the 
 character of almost a triumphal journey and a matter 
 
 1 Brantome, Hommes illustres, disc. LXVI ; De Thou, op. cit., 
 1. XLII. 
 
 2 This will is given in full by Waddington, op. cit., pp. 326-328. 
 ^ Petncs Ramus rectori et Academics Paris iensi (1868). See 
 
 Collect. Prcef., epist., etc., p. 206. 
 
92 PETEK RAMUS 
 
 of great moment to the entire scholastic world. ^ A 
 review of them in detail would furnish a very fair 
 picture of the intellectual and religious activities in 
 some of the most important centers in northern 
 humanism and the Reformation.- With two of his 
 pupils as secretaries, Ramus visited a large part of 
 Germany and Switzerland, and conferred with the 
 most renowned scholars in classics, mathematics, 
 logic, and especially theology. He continued after- 
 ward to correspond with those he visited, and the 
 letters, as far as they have been preserved, form a 
 thesaurus of source material on the movements of the 
 sixteenth century. The 'French Plato,' as Ramus 
 was called, was received with great consideration by 
 all the universities and cities to which he came. At 
 times, of course, he found opponents, but he made 
 more partisans, and the dissemination of his philos- 
 ophy left academic Germany divided in two camps, 
 the Aristotehans and the Ramists. His reputation 
 was fully maintained, and efforts were made at sev- 
 eral places to hold him permanently. Well-endowed 
 chairs were offered him in the Palatinate, Westphalia, 
 
 ' See especially the account of Banosius (pp. 26 ff.), one of the 
 secretaries. 
 
 - See pp. 5 ff, . ,^"i 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 93 
 
 and even Poland, Transylvania, and Hungary. While 
 there is reason to believe he might have liked to 
 lecture at Strassburg, Heidelberg, or some other uni- 
 versity near the French border, in order to impress 
 Paris with his overwhelming success, he generally 
 decHned the offers that were made him. Tt may be 
 that he did this for the same reason he had assigned 
 when called by the University of Bologna half a 
 dozen years before: "I am a Frenchman, and it is 
 through the favor of the king of France that I have 
 pursued my studies for many a long year. I belong, 
 therefore, entirely to my country and my king." * 
 
 Under the safe conduct of the king," Ramus 
 moved almost directly east across France, and came 
 first to Strassburg. Here he was met by a large 
 delegation and acclaimed like a prince of the blood. 
 He was entertained at the home of the famous 
 humanist, Sturm,^ with whom he had corresponded. 
 The two friends were now able to discuss personally 
 
 » Colledan. prcefat., pp. 195 and 198. -Op. cU., p. iqo. 
 
 ' It was supposed until recently that Sturm and Ascham were 
 complete converts to Ramism, but Guggenheim (Beitrdge, pp. 141 ff .) 
 has shown by a letter that passed between the two scholars that 
 while they were influenced by the new dialectic and were some- 
 what sympathetic, they did not altogether approve his criticism 
 of Aristotle and Cicero. 
 
94 PETER RAMUS 
 
 the study of the liberal arts, the education of youth, 
 the nature and effect of rewards, and other problems 
 in school and educational work generally. The pro- 
 fessors of the university and the teachers in the gym- 
 nasium ^ gave Ramus a public proof of their esteem 
 by tendering him a banquet. 
 
 Next, the reformer followed the Rhine south to 
 Basel.^ He visited Freiburg on the way, and, meet- 
 ing there the mathematician, Schreckfuchs, studied 
 in his library a marvelous celestial globe of brass 
 arranged according to the system of Copernicus. 
 At Basel he sojourned for the rest of 1568 and most of 
 the following year. Here he met Freigius, professor 
 of rhetoric, who became one of his most devoted dis- 
 ciples.^ He also found a number of his former pupils, 
 including the printer, Hervagius, and the professors 
 Jerome Wolf and Theodor Zwinger, and became 
 acquainted with the grammarian, Felix Platter,^ 
 
 1 See p. 3. 
 
 2 The details of his visit here are taken mostly from his eulogy 
 on the people of Basel in his work known as Basilea. See pp. 99 f. 
 
 ' We are indebted to Freigius for one of our most authentic 
 accounts of the life and v/ork of Ramus. See footnote i on p. 19. 
 
 ^ This was the son of that Thomas Platter, who, at his son's re- 
 quest, wrote the autobiography that has shed so much light on 
 the schools and education of the sixteenth century. See Monroe's 
 Thomas Platter. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 95 
 
 and the theologian, Samuel Grynaeus, and with many 
 scholars and men of prominence. The hostess of 
 Ramus in Basel, however, was the pious Catherine 
 Petit. This lady had entertained Calvin while he 
 was writing his Institutes of Christianity,^ and was 
 filled with memories of that great leader. Ramus 
 was also much impressed at Basel by a memorial of 
 another famous reformer, — the monument erected 
 to the wise and pious (Ecolampadius. At this center 
 of Protestantism, he seized the opportunity for in- 
 creasing his knowledge of theology by listening to the 
 lectures of Sulzer ^ and Coccius on the Old and New 
 Testaments in the original languages, and here laid 
 the groundwork of his posthumous Commentaries on 
 the Christian Religion.^ He likewise made it con- 
 venient, before leaving this part of Switzerland, to 
 confer at Ziirich with Bullinger and Simler, leaders 
 in Swiss Protestantism, and get their advice and that 
 of the other theologians upon his projected treatise. 
 Ramus did not, however, give all his productive 
 
 1 See p. 10. 
 
 2 His pleasant relations at Basel were marred only by a contro- 
 versy with this same Sulzer, and probably for this reason he alludes 
 to the tolerant BrandmuUer as the real successor of (Ecolampadius. 
 See Bernus, Pierre Ramus d, Bdle (Paris, 1890). 
 
 ^ Commentariorum de religione Christiana lihri quattuor (1576). 
 
96 PETER RAMUS 
 
 time ill Switzerland to theology. While at Basel, 
 one of the centers of printing, he produced two of his 
 chief treatises on mathematics, and combined his 
 views on grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, physics, and 
 metaphysics into a single work. Studies in the Liberal 
 Arts} Here also were published the letters that had 
 sprung from a rather unpleasant controversy over 
 dialectic with Schegk,- professor of philosophy at 
 Tubingen. It was from Basel also that he wrote 
 Sturm he would accept a position in the gymnasium, 
 in order to make known his method. But in spite 
 of the recommendation of that scholar and the Protes- 
 tant tendencies of Ramus, his services were declined 
 by the conservative authorities, on the ground that 
 he was 'not an Aristotelian.' 
 
 He visited other centers in Switzerland and met 
 many prominent scholars, theologians, and reformers 
 in each, but in no other place was his stay very long. 
 He next went north along the Rhine to Heidelberg, 
 where he sojourned for some time at the home of 
 Tremellius, the professor of Hebrew, from whom he 
 
 1 ScholcB in liberales arks (1569). 
 
 - P. Rami et Jacobi Schecii epistolcB, in quibus de art-is logics 
 institutione agitur (1569). Two years later at Lausanne he pub- 
 lished on the same subject Petri Rami Defensio pro Aristotele 
 
 aivosiis Jac. Scheciwm. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION. AND DEATH 97 
 
 acquired a complete defense of the reformed theol- 
 ogy.^ He met here also the leading professors and 
 councilors of the Palatinate, and was invited by the 
 elector, Frederick III, to accept a temporary place 
 in the university.^ While the faculty of 'arts' pro- 
 fessed to admire Ramus personally, they resisted 
 this appointment to the utmost. Although devoted 
 Protestants, they were still too conservative to sym- 
 pathize with a man who taught his own philosophy, 
 which was quite 'opposed to the truth and the doc- 
 trine of Aristotle.' The sovereign exerted his author- 
 ity to the utmost, and, in spite of repeated remon- 
 strances. Ramus was announced to lecture on Cicero's 
 oration. For Marcellus. Two factions also appeared 
 among the students, and every obstacle was thrown 
 in the way of his lecturing,^ but in the end, owing to 
 his eloquence, his instruction on this subject was 
 enthusiastically received. When, however, by spe- 
 cial request, Ramus undertook to lecture on dialectic, 
 a more serious insurrection broke out in the fanatical 
 
 ' Letter to Sturm, October or November, 1569. 
 
 "^ Letter to Zwinger, October 30, 1569. 
 
 ^ Even the steps to the lecture platform were taken away, and 
 Ramus mounted to his rostrum only by the aid of one of the French 
 students, and the lecture was at first interrupted with hisses, hoots, 
 and stamping. 
 
98 PETER RAMUS 
 
 faculty, and the elector was forced to suspend the lec- 
 tures for a time. Whereupon, writes Ramus to his 
 friend Zwinger : — 
 
 "Seizing the opportunity of disengaging myself, I 
 told the elector that there was some ground for the 
 opposition, since, if I should continue to teach a 
 month longer, a revolution in studies would neces- 
 sarily result. However, I remarked how surprising 
 it was in my judgment that, when the legitimate child, 
 the noble daughter of the University of Heidelberg, 
 was brought back by me to her own home, she should 
 be treated as a stranger, and repudiated by the pro- 
 fessors of the university. The prince asked my 
 meaning, and I answered that I had reference to the 
 true dialectic, as it had formerly been interpreted at 
 Heidelberg by Agricola with the applause of Ger- 
 many, France, and Italy." ^ 
 
 However, this very fear of the Ramistic dialectic 
 and strenuous opposition to it at both Strassburg and 
 Heidelberg, the great centers of humanism, shows 
 how great its influence was becoming. In fact, the 
 visit of Ramus to Germany and Switzerland must be 
 regarded as epoch-making in the history of human- 
 ism, AristoteHanism, and theology. His experience 
 
 1 Letter to Zwingc-y, January 23, 1570. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 99 
 
 in other places was similar Lo that already described. 
 When he left Heidelberg, a couple of months later, he 
 first journeyed north to Frankfurt, and thence south- 
 east to Nuremberg and Augsburg. At all these 
 places he held intercourse with the leading humanis- 
 tic, mathematical, and scientific scholars, and visited 
 the chief libraries and museums. In Augsburg he 
 became acquainted with the famous Tycho Brahe, 
 who, although but little more than a boy at the time, 
 had already made numerous astronomical observa- 
 tions and begun the hypotheses upon which his later 
 renown rests. 
 
 Now, however, hearing rumors of approaching 
 peace, Ramus hastened south rapidly through Swit- 
 zerland to Geneva, in the hope of reaching France 
 sooner. He was kindly received by Geneva, although 
 considerable opposition to his dialectic had arisen 
 through his correspondence with Theodore Beza, the 
 successor of Calvin in the administration of the city. 
 Upon request he gave a brief course here upon 
 Cicero's Catilinarian orations according to his 
 method. He made a profound impression, and many 
 of the students adopted his logic at the time. Ramus 
 next went a little out of his way to Lausanne to pub- 
 lish some of his works, especially the discourse in 
 
lOO PETER RAMUS 
 
 honor of the people of Basel. ^ In this city again he 
 met a number of humanists and theologians and gave 
 lectures on dialectic, but soon felt impelled to start 
 back to Paris. 
 
 Upon his return to the university, Ramus found 
 that his enemies had not been idle during his ab- 
 sence.^ In the face of the general amnesty, they had 
 induced the timorous king to interpret the agreement 
 in such a way as to bring Ramus under the head of 
 'deserters from the faith,' who had forfeited their 
 privileges in Paris. Two obscure men had been 
 installed in his positions at the College of Presles 
 and the College of France, respectively,^ and realizing 
 that the Cardinal of Lorraine had abandoned him 
 to his persecutors, he appealed to his old comrade 
 and protector in this letter of protest : — 
 
 "It was in your early youth, nearly thirty years 
 ago, that our mutual attachment arose. I was 
 myself very young then, but since those days I 
 have never ceased to publish and celebrate through 
 all the world your friendship for me. However, 
 such is the misfortune of the times that to-day 
 certain evil-minded persons go about declaring that 
 
 1 De Thou, 1. XLIV to the year 1568. 
 
 2 Du Boulay, op. cil., t. VI, pp. 658 ff. and 712 ff. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH lOI 
 
 the Cardinal of Lorraine is removing Peter Ramus 
 not only from his chair at the Royal College, to which 
 he was appointed by King Henry upon your nomi- 
 nation, but also from the principalship of the College 
 of Presles, — that is to say, from the fruit and 
 recompense of all my former labors. After complet- 
 ing my study and reform of the first five liberal arts, 
 and showing an equal zeal, or even greater, for the 
 advancement of the last two, I had reason to expect 
 a different treatment. Wherefore, in the name of the 
 white hairs that advise us both that death is not far 
 distant, do not suffer the end of our relations to be 
 so vastly different from the commencement, and from 
 a smiling beginning to close the whole course of our 
 years with so sad a finale. Do better than this; 
 condemn me rather to the hard and unremitting task 
 of forging and polishing the sciences. I would cheer- 
 fully do more than that, and such a vengeance would 
 be more becoming your magnanimity and high-mind- 
 edness." ^ 
 
 But he was not destined to receive either favor or 
 satisfaction from his former patron. In reply, the 
 cardinal evaded the issue by reproaching him in a 
 friendly way for not coming to see him, and then 
 
 1 See Collect, prafat., epist., pp. 254 fif. 
 
lOf PETER RAMUS 
 
 accused him of ingratitude, impiety, and rebellion.^ 
 Taking this as a sincere expression, Ramus wrote 
 another letter. He explained his not seeing the car- 
 dinal in person on the ground that he would have run 
 grave risks in so doing. As to 'ingratitude,' he 
 declared that he had, ' through his own labors and the 
 sweat of his brow,' shown himself worthy of the chair 
 bestowed upon him, and that he would long since 
 have resigned and accepted the better endowed chair 
 at Bologna, had he not hoped by remaining to show 
 his appreciation of past favors. As to 'impiety,' his 
 religious change should not be considered an apos- 
 tasy, but a return to the truth of the Gospel and the 
 primitive church which the cardinal himself had 
 praised at the Colloquy of Poissy. With regard to 
 'rebellion,' he insisted that his flight to St. Denis 
 was the only way in which he could escape assassina- 
 tion and that he had not borne arms in the battle - 
 against the government, and that he had soon left the 
 country for his visit to Germany and Switzerland. 
 He further besought the cardinal that, instead of 
 descending to such petty matters, he should allow him 
 to complete his treatises on the two remaining liberal 
 arts and then devote the rest of his life to a study of 
 
 1 See footnote on p. loi. * See pp. 90 f. 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 103 
 
 the Scriptures, and that the prelate himself should 
 turn to the more holy occupation of establishing 
 through the income of one of his numerous abbeys an 
 association of scholars who should carefully translate 
 both testaments into Latin and the vernacular, and 
 make a systematic arrangement of the principles of 
 Christian doctrine and practice.^ But the intriguing 
 cardinal had no time for such an ultramundane 
 program, and began to find his old friend not 
 only a nuisance, but possibly an obstacle to his 
 ambitions. Without more ado, he refrained from 
 interfering with the program of the reformer's ene- 
 mies, and on the 15th of December, 1570, Ramus 
 was excluded from active teaching and administra- 
 tion in the university. 
 
 In these extremities Ramus thought of retiring to 
 Geneva, where many would have been glad to see him 
 installed as a professor, and he asked a friend to sound 
 Beza, the head of the government of that city. But 
 Beza clearly, though politely, repulsed his overtures 
 upon the excuse that there was no vacancy in the 
 faculty and the university had no funds to establish 
 another chair. He added what was probably his 
 re«l animus, that he was inflexibly attached to Aris- 
 
 * See Collect. prafaL, epist., pp. 255 ff. 
 
104 PETER RAMUS 
 
 totle in logic and all other studies. Ramus was thus 
 forced to give up all hopes in this direction, and fell 
 into the depths of despair. But at this moment 
 another old schoolmate, the Cardinal of Bourbon, who 
 had become the chancellor of the university, inter- 
 ceded for the reformer with the queen-mother, and 
 secured for him an honorable compromise. It was 
 arranged that he should have his titles as principal 
 at Presles and as professor in the Royal College re- 
 stored to him, and that his salary in the latter capac- 
 ity should even be doubled, but that he should retire 
 from active service and give his time to writing and 
 translation. 
 
 Ramus joyfully accepted these conditions, and in 
 1 571 settled down at the College of Presles to com- 
 plete and revise all the liberal arts. But his perse- 
 cutors were not yet satisfied. They continually 
 maintained that the very presence of a Huguenot pro- 
 fessor was keeping proper-minded parents from send- 
 ing their sons to a university infected with heresy.^ 
 Carpentarius further attempted to persuade his col- 
 leagues in the College of France that the reputation of 
 having a heretic on the staff was injuring the insti- 
 tution, and threatened them with the wrath of the 
 1 Du Boulay, op. cit., t. VI, p. 669. 
 
CONVERSION PERSECUTION, AND DEATH 105 
 
 Cardinal of Lorraine and the suppression of the col- 
 lege, in case the offender were not expelled. ^ 
 
 It must have become more and more evident that 
 Ramus was doomed. His enemies would obviously 
 be satisfied with nothing short of his banishment or 
 death. Among those who realized this was his 
 friend, Jean de Montluc, Bishop of Valence, who 
 seems to have been a Protestant at heart and often 
 proved a good friend to the reformers.- It is not 
 unlikely that he had heard rumors of an impending 
 massacre of the Huguenots, and had especial fears for 
 Ramus. At any rate, it is known that he tried to 
 attach that reformer to his embassy, when on the 
 17th of August, 1572, he was sent to persuade the 
 Poles to accept the French king's brother as their 
 sovereign. Ramus had some scruples about under- 
 taking the mission^ and thus was left in the city 
 during the terrible slaughter of St. Bartholomew's, 
 which began just a week later. 
 
 It was not, however, until the third day, the 
 twenty-sixth, when most of the excesses were over, 
 that Ramus met his death, and the outrage seems to 
 
 * Carpentarius, Orationes (1568). 
 
 ' Dareste, Essai siir Fr. Hotnian, p. 9. 
 
 * Banosius, op. cit., p. 18. 
 
Io6 PETER KAMUS 
 
 have been a piece of private revenge on the part of 
 Carpentarius rather than a result of the general 
 massacre/ Hired assassins, led by a tailor and a 
 sergeant, forced their way into the College of Presles 
 and at length found Ramus in his little study on the 
 fifth floor. He was devoting his last moments to 
 prayer, and, as the old man rose from his knees, his 
 venerable dignity seemed for a moment to have 
 overawed the intruders. Seeing, however, that he 
 could hope for neither pity nor mercy, he commended 
 his soul to God and sought forgiveness for his trans- 
 gressions. If we may believe his biographers,^ his 
 last utterance was strangely like that of his Master 
 on Calvary. "Pardon these wretched men, my God, 
 
 1 Waddington devotes a chapter (IX) to this very hkely supposi- 
 tion. Besides the testimony of Nancel (p. 74), who declares that 
 the murder was contrary to the wishes of the king and queen- 
 mother, he bases his further proof upon the unanimity of all 
 historians, especially those who were contemporary, and upon 
 the character of Carpentarius and his writings. Carpentarius 
 had been reared by Galland in hatred of all innovations ; he was 
 the only man at the time systematically writing against Ramus ; 
 his ignorance had been exposed and his pride injured by Ramus 
 in the matter of his assumption of the chair of mathematics in the 
 Royal College ; and his constant attempts afterward to explain 
 the death of Ramus as due to public feeling and as a just punish- 
 ment, look suspicious. 
 
 ■■* See Banosius, pp. 34 f. ; Nancel, pp. 74 ff. ; 
 
CONVERSION, PERSECUriON, AND DEATH 107 
 
 for they know not what they do ! " Shot through the 
 head and pierced with a sword, he was flung from the 
 window. His fall was somewhat broken by a pro- 
 jecting roof, and the body fell palpitating into the 
 courtyard of the college. There further indignities 
 were heaped upon the body, and it was dragged with a 
 rope through the streets until the Seine was reached, 
 where a surgeon struck off the head, and the trunk was 
 cast into the river. Later it was drawn ashore again 
 and hacked to pieces on the banks of the Seine. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 General Principles and the Organization of 
 Education 
 
 During his stormy career Ramus had demon- 
 strated in his practice at the two colleges he served, 
 and formulated in the textbooks he had written upon 
 the liberal arts and theology, the way to an education 
 of broader scope and greater efficiency. His chief 
 aim was to spare the student the barrenness and need- 
 less difficulties that he himself had been obliged to 
 face. As we have seen, his denunciation of Aristotle 
 grew out of the formal dialectics and senseless dis- 
 putations that passed for an education during his 
 studentship at the College of Navarre. Accordingly, 
 he turned from the whole system in disgust. He pro- 
 ceeded to divest himself of scholastic philosophy and 
 strove to rationalize the training afforded by the 
 schools. He declares : — 
 
 "It was my constant study to remove from the 
 path of the liberal arts the briers and rocks, and all 
 
 intellectual obstacles and retardations, and to make 
 
 1 08 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES 1 09 
 
 even and straight the way, in order to arrive more 
 easily not only at intelligence, but the practice and 
 use of the liberal arts." ^ 
 
 Without explicitly discussing the ultimate meaning 
 and value of education, then. Ramus wished to im- 
 prove the material studied, and to render the meth- 
 ods of acquisition easier and more interesting. He 
 struggled to free all the arts from the barbarism into 
 which they had degenerated by selecting, arranging, 
 and presenting their content according to some defi- 
 nite plan. The principles for these reforms may be 
 summed up in three key-words, — nature, system, and 
 practice} 
 
 While he nominally sought his guidance with 
 complete independence of thought and investiga- 
 tion, he seems to have borrowed this trinity of ideals 
 from Quintilian, whose rhetorical work was most 
 influential among the humanists.^ Of the three 
 principles mentioned, the first applies more to the 
 determination of content and the last of method, 
 while the second comes somewhat into consideration 
 in both connections. His standardization for the 
 
 1 See Remonstrance an conscil prive, pp. 27 f. 
 * Natura, ratio, exercitatio. See Instil, dial., I, 2. 
 ^ See Instit. Oral., Ill, 2. These principles were, however, 
 picibabl}' used first by Aristotle. 
 
no PETER RMIUS 
 
 subject matter, then, he finds in the observation of 
 nature. For example, the material for grammar or 
 language study he desires to have derived from 
 actual usage, — ■ the ancient tongues from the classi- 
 cal writers, and the modern from the speech of the 
 people. Similarly, he holds that logic should be 
 based upon observation of the human mind, and 
 natural sciences upon the investigation of nature. 
 The application of this principle will be shown defi- 
 nitely in his treatment of the different liberal arts. 
 
 When the subject matter has been obtained, he 
 holds that it must be thoroughly sifted and arranged. 
 The principles for system, or arrangement, he seems 
 to have taken from Aristotle, and the laws for defin- 
 ing and organizing the various subjects of study 
 may be termed universality, homogeneity, and prim- 
 acy of the general} His dialectic works describe 
 these underlying standards in full, but in his other 
 important treatises he also states them, though with- 
 out much discussion.- This shows how rigidly he 
 
 1 KuTo, TravTos, Ka6' ai'To, and k<xO' uXov ; see A nalytica Hysiera, 
 4. The Lalin forms are de onini, per se, and universalilcr primum. 
 Ramus may have been more influenced in this by Vives's works 
 and Sturm's lectures on logic, both of which were in agreement with 
 ihifi Aristotelian scheme. 
 
 ^ See preface to Sckolce in liberates aries, etc. 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES III 
 
 applied tlie rules of real logic to all subjects/ although 
 he strenuously objected to the stereotyped scho- 
 lastic dialectic, which had so restricted the content 
 and method of the liberal arts. While the applica- 
 tion and elaboration of these principles of 'system' 
 will be made clearer as each one of the liberal arts is 
 treated, it may be well to elucidate them in general 
 here. 
 
 In the first place, the law of 'universality' is that 
 every precept must be in keeping with truth, not 
 only in some instances, but always. It must neces- 
 sarily, and not accidentally, be true; its validity 
 must be incontrovertible. For the arts must have a 
 sure basis ; they must, in accordance with Plato's doc- 
 trine,^ rest upon ideas, since they are not created, but 
 have always existed. Judged by this principle, much 
 of scholasticism, especially in dialectics, would be 
 found invalid, since it would not be universally 
 applicable. For instance, the geometrical proposi- 
 tion that ' the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal 
 to two right angles ' is valid, but the statement that 
 'every angle of a triangle is equal to sixty degrees' 
 
 1 See Remonstrance au conseil prive, p. 27. 
 
 - This reference to Platonic idealism is found in the ScholcB 
 rheioricce,lX, si3- See Plato, Republic, Book VI; Pkadrus, 2^6 
 5. ; Meno, 80 flf. ; etc. 
 
112 PETER RAMUS 
 
 would not hold, since it would not apply to isosceles 
 or scalene triangles.^ Thus this standard eliminates 
 all fallacies and inaccuracies, and is called by Ramus 
 'the law of truth.' His second law, that of 'homo- 
 geneity,' is that all precepts must be germane to the 
 subject and to each other. For example, Aristotle 
 states that it would be ' unarithmetical' to speak of 
 size in arithmetic, and ' ungeometrical ' to deal with 
 number in geometry. Similarly, it is invalid to treat of 
 rhetorical figures in grammar, or of the parts of speech 
 in rhetoric. The boundaries between the arts should 
 be carefully marked so that clarity may be maintained, 
 and, since this principle defines the province of each 
 subject, Ramus names it 'the law of justice.' The 
 third rule is deductive and maintains that the general 
 should precede and the particular should follow.^ 
 In other words, whatever applies universally through- 
 out a subject should be stated at the outset of the 
 exposition, and only then. For if the particular is 
 stated first, it will not be characteristic of the entire 
 class ; and if the universal is postponed, it will have 
 to be repeated in each particular case. To use the 
 
 ^ Cf. ScholcB grammaticcE, I, 7. 
 
 ^ Ramus expresses it tersely as generalia non speciatim specialia 
 non generatim. 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES I13 
 
 former illusLration, ' the sum of the angles of a tri- 
 angle is equal to two right angles ' is a general charac- 
 teristic of the figure ; it should be stated once at 
 the beginning, and not repeated each time in deal- 
 ing with equilateral, isosceles, and scalene triangles. 
 This principle helps to produce a clearer arrangement 
 of the material, and, through a natural and appro- 
 priate development of each subject, greatly facilitates 
 the memory of the pupil. Consequently it is denomi- 
 nated by Ramus 'the law of wisdom.' 
 
 Thus by means of these three laws our reformer 
 undertook to criticize the mass of subject matter em- 
 ployed in the education of the times. He added lit- 
 tle to the curriculum, but, as Vives, Sturm, Melanch- 
 thon, and other humanists had done in a less degree, 
 he separated the wheat from the chaff. The useless 
 and false material that had crept in through medieval 
 commentaries, sophistry, and faith in authority, he 
 was able, by means of the law of 'truth,' to detect 
 and eliminate, and, by means of the laws of ' justice ' 
 and 'wisdom,' he found a more logical and more 
 easily remembered arrangement, and rid the various 
 subjects of confusion and tautology. In this respect 
 his educational ideal of 'nature' and 'observation' 
 may be said to have led to the further aim of clear- 
 
J. 1 4 PETER RAMUS 
 
 ing llic liberal arts uf falsehood, surreptitious matter, 
 and repetitions. Or to state the matter positively, 
 his ideal of 'system' implied that the subjects 
 should be given a true, homogeneous, and simple 
 exposition. 
 
 In the matter of method, by means of his third 
 principle, practice, Ramus also endeavored to make 
 considerable improvement upon the current proced- 
 ure. The scholastic instruction at the University 
 of Paris consisted in lectures, repetitions, and dispu- 
 tations. These methods were not bad in themselves, 
 but serious abuses had grown up in them. Owing 
 to the scarcity and great cost of textbooks, the lec- 
 tures had come to consist mostly in lengthy dicta- 
 tions from the authors under consideration. Such 
 time as was given to exposition was largely wasted in 
 literal explanations of the passages read, and there 
 was a plethora of qu'bbles and hair-splitting distinc- 
 tions in the discussion of all the liberal arts. The 
 repetitions consisted in the mere mechanical recita- 
 tion of rhymed rules and difficult definitions. But 
 the most fixed and formal feature of the uni- 
 versity method was, as Ramus declared,^ the dispu- 
 tation. Thanks to the prominence of the scholastic 
 
 * See pp. 2i ff. 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES I15 
 
 dialeclic and philosophy, these fruitless alfairs seem 
 to have been the chief goal of instruction from the 
 very beginning of the course. 
 
 As Erasmus and other humanists had foreseen, 
 such methods spelled death for the Hberal arts, and 
 it was the increasing aim of Ramus to reform them. 
 Like the humanists generally, he constantly attempted 
 to simplify and render the subjects intelligible. In- 
 stead of dallying over abstract rules, he advised that 
 the principles be made clear by illustrations taken 
 from the works of the classical authors and by imi- 
 tation of them in written and oral exercises. But he 
 went much further in rationalizing his pedagogy 
 than Vives, Sturm, and any of the other humanists, 
 although their works doubtless proved suggestive 
 to him. He strove to render the general approach of 
 humanism more specific, and laid out a definite pro- 
 cedure for each portion of the school day .^ During the 
 first hour the teacher is to lecture on the topic of the 
 day, give the underlying principles, develop, and ex- 
 plain, but make very little of the exercise a dictation. 
 The next two hours are devoted by the pupils to 
 working up, each by himself, what has been learned 
 
 1 Pro philosophica Parisiensis academic discipUna in Colled. 
 Ptcef., pp. 325 ff- 
 
Il6 PETER RAMUS 
 
 during the lecture. The fourth hour is given to recit- 
 ing to the teacher and making sure that the meaning 
 and rules are understood and memorized. During 
 the last two hours come a discussion and disputation, 
 to discover whether the pupil can develop for himself 
 what has been learned and can explain and apply 
 it independently. This completes the work of the 
 morning, and the afternoon is given to a similar 
 combination of methods. 
 
 Thus, according to the general plan of Ramus, five 
 hours are required in every instance to impress and 
 make of value what is learned in one hour. He defi- 
 nitely held that the activities of the teacher should 
 not close with his lecture and dictation, but that he 
 should continue working with his pupils, hearing 
 them recite and correcting false impressions, and 
 especially stamping home the right principles by 
 ' practice' or application. Ramus here, as everywhere, 
 seems to stress application and utility. 'Practice' 
 plays the most important part in his method, since 
 out of it grow the use of rules and the real value of the 
 subject. He frequently makes a division of the daily 
 routine into two chief phases, * explanation ' and * prac- 
 tice.' The former term appears prominently in 
 exposition, repetition, and even discussion, but he 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES 1I7 
 
 held that it is in itself senseless and useless. "If 
 we stop with the explanation," says he, "we are like 
 the guests of HeHogabalus." ^ The real end and aim 
 of all method is, in his mind, ' practice,' ^ since only 
 in this way does the student learn to use his knowl- 
 edge. There are two aspects to this process, — 
 'analysis' and 'genesis.' ^ The one consists in a 
 critical dissection and testing to see how the author 
 of the example conforms to the rules ; the other in 
 first copying the style and thought and producing 
 something akin to the model, and in later creating 
 independently and forming without outside help a 
 work of one's own, which shall not only equal the 
 model, but possibly surpass it. By means of this 
 combination of analysis and synthesis there can be 
 generated a genuine self -activity, and the pupils can 
 be enabled to secure an excellent mastery of the sub- 
 ject matter. 
 
 In this way Ramus strove to make the instruction 
 at the College of Presles more interesting, critical, 
 and effective. Thanks to the ' explanation,' the stu- 
 
 1 Schol. dial., IV, 189. An allusion to the banquet at which this 
 emperor smothered the chief men of Rome in a shower of roses. 
 
 ^ Schol. dial., XX, 604. 
 
 » See ibid., VII, 262 ff. and 299 ff. ; Instil. dial.^Jll, 360 flf. ; 
 and Schol. rhet., XVIII, 381, etc. 
 
Il8 : PETER RAMUS 
 
 dents were never forced to commit what they did not 
 understand, and only so far as it was absolutely neces- 
 sary did they merely learn and recite, but, by means 
 of the twofold process of 'practice,' they became in- 
 dependent and original. The procedure at which our 
 French reformer aimed was in line with that of Vives, 
 Sturm, and other humanists. These reformers gen- 
 erally tended to abbreviate the theoretical 'explana- 
 tion' and stress the real 'practice,' and to use for this 
 purpose examples from the classical authors. But 
 no one of them developed his position so clearly and 
 systematically as Ramus, although he did not crys- 
 tallize his curriculum and method into any such sharp 
 division by years as did Sturm. In the next three 
 chapters we shall see how these principles of con- 
 tent and method worked out in the specific subjects 
 of the liberal arts. 
 
 Numerous pedagogical advantages could easily be 
 prophesied for these principles of Ramus in content 
 and method. They naturally augured clearness and 
 brevity in the curriculum, and facility, interest, and 
 economy to the student. We can, therefore, scarcely 
 be surprised to learn that Ramus reduced the length 
 of the course in the liberal arts to seven years. Three 
 years, instead of five, or even seven (with Vives and 
 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES 11 9 
 
 Sturm), were given to the languages or 'grammar,' 
 and one year each to rhetoric, dialectic, mathematics, 
 and physics. This curtailment of the years of study 
 was, however, undoubtedly effected by Ramus not 
 only through a better arrangement of the content, 
 but by the fact that he would grant a much smaller 
 number of holidays. With the exception of about 
 thirty days, he believed in holding school the entire 
 year.^ Under this system, therefore, the pupils, who 
 were supposed to enter at eight, would have com- 
 pleted their work in the liberal arts by the time they 
 were fifteen, and, since Ramus holds elsewhere that 
 the transition to the university should begin at this 
 stage of their work,^ they would be able to complete 
 their professional course in the latter institution at 
 a comparatively early age. 
 
 1 See pp. 46 and 64. * See p. 84. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 The Content and Method of the Trivium 
 
 Such were the general principles and laws that 
 Ramus wished to follow in determining the content 
 and method of the liberal arts and other subjects. 
 He was thoroughly convinced of the validity and 
 efficiency of these logical ideals, and felt that by 
 applying them rigidly to each of the disciplines he 
 could greatly clarify and simplify their study. The 
 liberal arts of the times he divided into the 'exoteric,' 
 which were the grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic of 
 the old trivium, and the 'esoteric,' which corresponded 
 roughly to the former quadrivium, and with him in- 
 cluded mathematics (i.e. arithmetic and geometry), 
 physics, metaphysics, and ethics. The 'exoteric' 
 arts were, of course, easier of approach and of more 
 general utility, and with them he began his reform. 
 While 'dialectic,' or logic, has been shown to underlie 
 the arrangement and presentation of them all, we will 
 here take them up in order and turn first to grammar. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVroM 121 
 
 As far as grammar was concerned, at Paris in the 
 time of Ramus the medieval textbooks and methods 
 held complete sway. The Elegancies of Latin ^ by 
 Valla had for almost a century been paving the way 
 for an improvement of Latin writing, but the work 
 was scarcely known in Paris. There Donatus and 
 Priscian had been replaced by such works as the 
 Doctrinale of Alexander of Villedieu, which, for the 
 sake of easy memorizing, were often written in bad 
 verse. One of the most popular of these was the Ridi- 
 ments of Despantere, which began its vogue about the 
 time that Ramus was born. The most difficult and 
 unintelligible presentation of grammar blocked the 
 way to any real knowledge of the subject, and while 
 the poets, like Vergil and Ovid, were able to persist 
 and furnish some notion of style, the Latin prose 
 writers were still generally forbidden as heathen.^ 
 In consequence, the most atrocious Latin was com- 
 mon. The colloquial abominations of the schoolmen 
 and the theologians, mixed with an extensive collec- 
 tion of barbarisms and Gallicisms, were in general 
 use in the higher schools. At times even the pro- 
 
 ^ EleganticB LatincB. See Voigt, Die Wiederlebung des clas- 
 sischen AUerthums, II, 378. 
 
 2 See Paulsen, Gcschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts, pp. 24 f. 
 
122 PETER RAMUS 
 
 fessors of the university were positively ungram- 
 matical.^ Moreover;, the grammatical treatises of 
 the day were inaccurate, repetitious, and filled with 
 dialectic and metaphysical discussions quite foreign 
 to the subject. 
 
 We have already narrated ^ how, between the years 
 1559 and 1562, in order to effect some reform in this 
 subject, Ramus produced at least half a dozen works 
 upon grammar. Three of these were devoted to 
 Latin, and two to Greek, while the sixth treatise 
 dealt with the vernacular."^ In each of these, accord- 
 ing to his principle of 'nature,' he was guided by 
 actual use. He did not set himself up as an arbiter 
 
 1 Ramus even afi&rms {Schol. gram., II, 15) that ego amat seemed 
 as correct to certain Sorbonists as ego amo. Probably the racy 
 satire in the Epistolce obscurorum virorum, while an exaggeration, 
 had a real basis of fact. At any rate, a work in four volumes 
 known as Grcecarum Institutionum rudimenta, which was published 
 in Paris by George Mauropaedius only five years before the gram- 
 matical works of Ramus began to appear, and is still in existence, 
 exhibits the most barbarous blunders in its Latinity. 
 
 - See pp. 57 f . 
 
 ' His interest in his native language to the extent of producing 
 vernacular treatises on both grammar and dialectic, at a time when, 
 according to Pasquier, it was doubted whether it was "worth while 
 to couch the arts in French," shows his progressive patriotism and 
 modern spirit. He also demanded unceasingly a vernacular trans- 
 hition of the Scriptures, and it is well known that he was ambitious 
 to sec his native land build up a genuine national literature. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 25 
 
 of speech, like Donatus and Priscian, but judged 
 of the Latin and Greek by means of the classical 
 authors, and of the French by the speech of the 
 people.^ In the grammar of each language, he 
 adopted a short and easy method according to the 
 definite rules which obtain throughout his texts on 
 the liberal arts,- and thus eliminated most of the 
 fallacies, impertinences, and repetitions of the exist- 
 ing grammars. Also, in keeping with his plan, he 
 endeavored to turn his 'explanation' into 'practice' 
 as soon as possible;^ The form in which the works 
 themselves were written furnished a model of correct- 
 ness and elegance that had been little known for 
 centuries. 
 
 The limitations of space forbid our even outlining 
 the plan employed by Ramus in each of his grammati- 
 cal treatises, but that used in his works on Latin,^ the 
 most important language of the times,^ may be given 
 here as an example of them all. In order to avoid 
 repetition, in keeping with his principle of the 'pri- 
 
 ' Schol. gram., II, 11 ff. See also p. no. 
 - See pp. 109 flf. 
 ■' See pp. 114 ff. 
 
 * I.e. the Grammatics Latincs libri quattuor, Rvdimenta gram- 
 maticcE, and his extensive Scholm grammatics. See p. 57. 
 ^ See footnote 3 on p. 122, 
 
124 PETER RAMUS 
 
 macy of the general,'^ he treats the subject deduc- 
 tively. He begins with the most general statement 
 possible, and defines grammar as 'the art of talking 
 correctly.' ^ He thus establishes a definite and 
 practical goal. Throughout he avoids all extraneous 
 topics, and outlines the subject as clearly as possible. 
 His first large division of grammar is into ' etymology ' 
 and 'syntax,'^ for he scorns any such tautological 
 heads as the 'orthography' of Quintilian, the 'anal- 
 ogy' of Varro, or 'prosody,' which he deals with in 
 rhetoric.^ 
 
 In etymology he begins with a discussion of the 
 letters and pronunciation. In the case of both 
 these subjects Ramus attempted to institute reforms. 
 He recommended the use of the characters j and v to 
 represent the consonant sounds, that had up to that 
 time been included in i and u and were subject to 
 confusion with the vowels.^ They were, in conse- 
 
 1 See p. 112. 
 
 2 Grammalica est ars bene loquendi. See Gram. Lat., IV, Preface. 
 ^ Books I and II of Grammatica Latina are devoted to ' etymol- 
 ogy ' ; Books III and IV to 'syntax.' ^ See Schol. gram., II, lo ff. 
 
 ^ His priority in this distinction is conceded by all his contempo- 
 raries from Freigius (pp. 23 f.) and Nancel (pp. 39 f.), who enthu- 
 siastically praise the step, to Scahger {Scaligerana, p. 288), who 
 considers it foolish and vexatious. See also Ramus himself (Schol. 
 Gram., 1. II). 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 12$ 
 
 quence, for a long time known as ' the Ramist conso- 
 nants.' He also made prevalent in the schools an 
 exact and elegant pronunciation, although, as has 
 been pointed out, this cost him a serious struggle 
 with the Sorbonists.^ Next, he discusses syllables, 
 and their formation and quantity, as well as accent 
 and expression, and the origin and formation of 
 words. 
 
 Then he considers the parts of speech, which he 
 again divides into two classes, — words with ' num- 
 ber' and words without 'number.' Under the first 
 head he groups substantives and verbs. ^ Substan- 
 tives include pronouns and adjectives, as well as 
 nouns, and have, as their distinguishing modifica- 
 tions, gender and case. Instead of the five declen- 
 sions, employed by Varro and grammars of the pres- 
 ent day, Ramus groups his substantives under two 
 
 1 See pp. 62 f. In French he also wished, like Etienne Dolet 
 and other humanistic theorists, to introduce reformed spelling, but 
 this step proved too radical, when the pronunciation of that lan- 
 guage has differed so greatly in different sections of the country 
 and from century to century. Even Pasquier {Lettres, 1. Ill, 4) dis- 
 approves of this reform on the grounds stated above, and Ramus 
 anticipated {Gram. Lat., VII, 56) that these objections would 
 be made. 
 
 2 The first part of Book I is devoted to 'substantives' and the 
 second to 'verbs.' 
 
126 PETER RAMUS 
 
 declensions, (i) that where tlie substantive has the 
 same number of syllables in all cases, and (2) that 
 where it has a different number. He further divides 
 the ' equal-syllabled ' declension, according as -is ap- 
 pears in the dative plural (as in the first and second 
 declensions of our present-day Latin grammar), or 
 does not; and the 'unequal-syllabled' declension he 
 groups under two heads, which correspond respec- 
 tively to our third declension and to our fourth and 
 fifth. While, therefore, he really discriminates four 
 declensions, it seems like a much simpler, easier, and 
 more logical arrangement, and it enables him to treat 
 the irregular nouns with the others.^ Last of all he 
 deals with the indeclinables, among which he men- 
 tions the cardinal numerals. 
 
 The modifications of verbs he gives as tense and 
 person. He makes the important modification of 
 moods of little account, showing by a number of 
 examples that there is no clear distinction in their 
 meaning.^ The three chief tenses — present, past, 
 and future — are explained, first for the finite moods 
 and then for the infinitive. Here also he is able to 
 
 1 In his larger work, ScholcB grammatica, XIII, he also discusses 
 the irregular adjectives. 
 ^ See Schol. gram., XIV. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 27 
 
 treat irregularities and variations wiLliouL a separate 
 discussion. He also gives due attention to the gerund 
 and the supine on the one hand, and to the participles 
 on the other, treating the former as substantives, and 
 the latter as verbs, instead of as separate parts of 
 speech. Under their second modification. Ramus 
 divides verbs into personal and impersonal. He 
 does not distinguish the personal verbs, according 
 to their variations, as inchoative, frequentative, and 
 desiderative, since this seems to him to be valueless 
 to the student, but he does divide them into active, 
 passive, and deponent.^ In the matter of conjuga- 
 tion he makes two classes, according as the future 
 ends in -bo or -am. As, however, he subdivides both 
 these classes, he practically distinguishes the four 
 conjugations that are usually given now, although 
 here again he does not treat the irregulars by them- 
 selves. 
 
 The second part of et>Tnology, which deals with 
 words that do not have number, is exceedingly brief. 
 It bears upon the four indeclinable parts of speech, — 
 adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, and interjec- 
 tions, — but the use of the last two is deferred until 
 syntax is reached. 
 
 I Ibid., XVI. 
 
128 PETER RAMUS 
 
 Ramus then takes up syntax, which he defines as 
 'the construction of words,' and deals with it under 
 the main heads of ' agreement ' and ' government.' ^ 
 Under both these divisions he again considers words 
 with 'number' and words without 'number.' He 
 groups under words with number the agreement of 
 substantive with substantive, in which adjectives 
 are included, and of verb with substantive. Under 
 the former are given the rules for apposition and 
 attributive, including all irregular cases where the 
 word in apposition or the attribute refers to several 
 substantives. Under the latter come the rules for 
 subject and predicate. In the agreement of words 
 without number, he deals first with adverbs that 
 form the comparative and superlative degrees, and 
 then with conjunctions, according to their place in 
 the sentence. He also mentions 'asyndeton,' or 
 omission of the conjunction, and 'polysyndeton,' or 
 figurative repetition of the conjunction. 
 
 The government of words with number considers 
 nouns and verbs. Under the former come (i) the 
 subjective, objective, and characteristic genitive, and 
 
 ^ Book III of the Grammatica Latina is mostly taken up with a 
 consideration of Synlaxis convenientue and Book IV with syniaxis 
 rectionis. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 29 
 
 the ablative of characteristic, including adjectives 
 in these constructions, and (2) the partitive genitive 
 with comparatives, superlatives, and numerals, the 
 genitive with adjectives of 'plenty and want,' and 
 the dative of 'benefit or injure.' Under verbs are 
 first treated transitive verbs, active and passive, 
 intransitive verbs of 'acquisition' taking the dative, 
 transitive verbs with the double accusative, and 
 verbs of 'plenty and want' with the ablative or 
 genitive. He then discusses the verb governing 
 another verb, including an infinitive as the object 
 of a verb of 'wish' or 'desire,' and a supine in -um 
 after verbs of motion. He finally mentions the 
 infinitival construction and the ten impersonal verbs 
 that take the genitive. The government of words 
 without number is very briefly considered. It deals 
 with adverbs of 'place,' which take the genitive, and 
 constructions with interjections and prepositions. 
 
 The diagram on the next page may perhaps serve 
 to make clearer the organization of grammar accord- 
 ing to Ramus. An examination of the scheme reveals 
 how completely Ramus, in determining the content 
 and arrangement of his Grammar, has fulfilled his 
 three principles of 'truth,' 'justice,' and 'wisdom.' 
 He seems to have skillfully avoided all fallacious, 
 
130 
 
 PETER RAMUS 
 
 extraneous, and repetitious material. Tiierc liice- 
 wise appears here a new principle of organiza- 
 tion, which savors more of a scholastic origin, and 
 of which we shall hear again later. This is his 
 'dichotomy,' or consistent division of each class into 
 two species. 
 
 
 
 words 
 
 letters 
 I syllables 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 modifica- f gender 
 
 
 
 
 with 
 
 substan- 
 tives 
 
 tions 
 declensions 
 
 I case 
 equal- 
 syllabled 
 unequal- 
 
 
 Ety- 
 
 
 number 
 
 
 syllabled 
 
 
 mology 
 
 parts of 
 speech 
 
 
 , modiiica- 
 
 , tions 
 verls j 
 
 1 conjugations ' 
 
 tense 
 person 
 future in -bo 
 future in -am 
 
 Grantmar, 
 
 
 
 
 f adverbs 
 
 I conjunctions 
 
 ' the art of 
 
 
 
 without 
 
 talking cor- 
 
 
 
 number 
 
 2 / prepositions 
 I interjections 
 
 rectly,' is 
 
 
 
 
 divtdad 
 
 
 
 
 
 substantive with f apposition 
 substantive I attributive 
 
 into: 
 
 
 
 
 with 
 
 
 
 
 
 number 
 
 verb with substan- f subject 
 tive I predicate 
 adverbs of degree 
 
 
 
 agreement 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 without 
 
 f asyndeton 
 
 
 Syntax 
 
 
 
 number 
 with 
 
 conjunctions | polysynde- 
 
 l ton 
 nouns 1 genitive and ablative 
 I genitive and dative 
 
 
 
 govermner 
 
 t 
 
 number 
 
 , f transitive 
 verbs i . ^ 
 
 I intransitive 
 
 
 
 
 
 without ( adverbs of place 
 
 
 
 
 
 numbf 
 
 r \ 
 
 interjections and prepositions 
 
 Like all schemata, this principle of division at times 
 plays havoc with the natural order of things, and 
 inevitably brings it about that matters closely 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 13I 
 
 related are sundered in presentation. Moreover, 
 while in etymology this clever scheme covers every- 
 thing of importance about the parts of speech, in 
 syntax it omits much from their possible constructions. 
 Yet it can easily be seen how much more convenient 
 must have been such a brief and logical classification, 
 and what an advance it marks over the grammars 
 that were in use. It has eliminated most of the 
 philosophical and dialectic ballast that had been 
 slipped into syntactical instruction, and it has 
 struggled more energetically even than the attempts 
 of other humanists to free itself of scholastic influ- 
 ence. It limits itself to grammar, pure and simple, 
 and secures its illustrations from the usage of the 
 best Latin writers. To clarity and definiteness of 
 organization it added brevity and intelligibility of 
 language. While but few directions are given, they 
 are all of immediate use, and the learner is soon led 
 from dry and difficult rules to a vital study of the 
 authors themselves. It must have called forth a new 
 interest in the pupil, and made the work lighter and 
 more rapid. The close connection of this grammar 
 with the humanistic movement, as well as its remark- 
 able success in the schools, is shown by the attempted 
 union of it with the work of Melanchthon that ap- 
 
132 PETER RAMUS 
 
 peared in a Philip po-Ramian Grammar,^ published 
 twenty years after the death of our reformer. 
 
 Ramus has also furnished us with some account of 
 the way this subject of grammar should be taught. 
 During the three years to be given to grammar,^ he 
 seems to have intended that both Latin and Greek 
 should be pursued, but that most emphasis should 
 be given the former subject, and the arrangement 
 in the four books of his Latin Grammar should be 
 followed. After acquiring the letters and syllables 
 and securing a little facility in reading and writ- 
 ing Latin, the student was to take up the declen- 
 sions and conjugations. But he was to be given 
 few rules of syntax, and to learn more through ex- 
 amples than formal grammar. Easy illustrations 
 and selections were to be taken from the Bucolics 
 of Vergil and the Comedies of Terence, and from 
 the simpler works of Cicero and Homer. The first 
 year was to be given mainly to etymology and to 
 teaching the pupils to express themselves and ac- 
 quire a vocabulary. The second year these acquisi- 
 tions were to be strengthened, deepened, and wid- 
 
 » See Schmid, Encyclopadie, IV, p. 931. Cf. the Philippo- 
 Ramists in dialectic, p. 217. 
 '^ See pp. 118 f. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVHJM 133 
 
 ened. Considerable practice and more complete 
 mastery of the classical writers were to be afforded. 
 In the third year etymology was to be reviewed, with 
 illustrations furnished by the student himself, and 
 syntax was to be completed. But in this ' explanation ' 
 and in ' practice ' ^ the knowledge and power of the 
 youth were gradually to be increased. The models 
 analyzed ^ were to be more and more extended, and, 
 while deaUng with them, the student was to learn 
 from this usage of the best authors his etymology 
 and syntax, orthography and prosody. Then, after 
 the 'practice' in 'analysis,' the pupil was to take up 
 'genesis,' or production on his own account.^ Here, 
 too, there is a gradual increase in difficulty, beginning 
 with mere imitation and later coming to more inde- 
 pendent composition. 
 
 Ramus seems to have spent much time and effort 
 in elaborating the best methods of acquiring Latin 
 and Greek. He felt that, whereas rhetoric and dia- 
 lectic were to some extent natural gifts, a knowledge 
 of these dead languages, both because of their intrin- 
 
 ' See pp. ii6f. 
 
 ^ .\n excellent illustration of the way in which this ' analysis ' 
 may be carried on is given with the hexameter, O Melibcee, deus 
 nobis luBC otia fecit, in the Schola dialectics, VII, 191. 
 
 'See p. 117. 
 
134 PETER RAMUS 
 
 sic difficult}^ and their being the key to the other 
 arts, required the greatest industry and the most 
 skilled instruction. Instead of basing his methods 
 upon logic and formal grammar, Ramus hoped to 
 lure the youths into a study of Latin and Greek 
 by having them read the classical authors them- 
 selves as soon as possible. In this respect he was 
 not unlike the rest of the humanists, but he seems 
 to have excelled them all in reducing to a minimum 
 the number of years that must be spent in acquiring 
 grammar. 
 
 In the reforms he proposed for rhetoric, however, 
 it is obvious that Ramus received more opposition 
 than he did in the matter of grammar.^ The reason 
 lying back of the storm that arose over his efforts to 
 improve the teaching of rhetoric was that the author- 
 ity upon which rhetoric was based was not merely 
 that of some medieval writer, like Martianus Capella 
 or Cassiodorus, but of Cicero and Quintilian them- 
 selves. Even the humanists, although they were 
 free from the scholastic verbosity and the digressions 
 that appear in most of the textbooks of the times, 
 taught rhetoric according to Cicero and Quintilian, 
 and Melanchthon even intended his Institutions of 
 
 1 See pp. 42 ff. Cf. also preface to the Scholce rhetorics. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRFVIUM 135 
 
 RItcloric as an introductory book to these authors. "^ 
 But Ramus did not bow down before even such 
 great authorities. While he fully appreciated Cicero 
 and Quintilian, he held that they were not infallible 
 and that their antiquity was not sufficient warrant 
 for the abuses which the current textbooks had 
 wrought in their name. He, accordingly, applied 
 his laws of 'truth,' 'justice,' and 'wisdom' to the 
 content of rhetoric, and rigidly rejected all that 
 had been smuggled into the subject. Rhetoric, he 
 declared, should be an art in itself, and not the 
 exercising ground of another art.^ 
 
 It seemed fallacious to him to combine rhetoric 
 with grammar, as suggested by Quintilian, and he i 
 held it confusing to insist, with Cicero, that dialectic, j 
 philosophy, ethics, and various other subjects are ' 
 essential to the orator as such. These matters, 
 while improving to him as a man, have nothing to 
 do with his rhetorical training. For rhetoric it is] 
 necessary only to know the rules of the art of speech, 
 so as to use them effectively, in the same way that 
 grammar consists in the use of correct language.^ 
 
 ' See Messer, Quintilian als didaktikey {Neue Jahrhiicher fiir 
 Philologie und Padagogik, 1897, pp. 415 f,). 
 ^Schol. rhet., I, pp. 233 ff. 
 
136 PETER RAMUS 
 
 The content of what one is to say must not be con- 
 fused, as in Cicero, with the outer form. 
 
 Ramus, therefore, defines rhetoric as 'the art 
 of effective speaking,' ^ and limits its divisions to 
 'expression' and 'action.' He altogether ignores 
 'invention' and 'arrangement,' together with 
 'memory,' which is really a reflection of them, on the 
 ground that these topics belong more properly to 
 logic, even if all five divisions are given by the an- 
 cient writers.^ Expression he defines as the elegant 
 adornment of speech,"^ and he divides it into ' tropes ' 
 and 'figures.' The former of these refers to the 
 figurative use of single words. It is subdivided 
 into metonymy, irony, metaphor, and synecdoche, 
 and some of these classes are still further divided. 
 ' Figures ' indicate a change of dress in a combina- 
 tion of words, and are of two kinds, — figures of 
 diction and figures of thought. Figures of diction 
 have reference to a change in the outer form, indi- 
 cated by a turn in the rhythm or meter, and are 
 ordinarily treated under 'prosody,' which, as has 
 been stated,* Ramus does not recognize in grammar. 
 
 ' Rhetorica est ars bene dicendi. 
 ^Schol. rhet., I, p. 237 ; IX, p. 319. 
 * Ibid., V, pp. 290 f. 
 *Sce p. 124. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 137 
 
 Under this head are enumerated nine figures of 
 speech, of which the best known are paronomasia, 
 climax, and anaphor. Figures of thought imply 
 some movement of the mind expressed in speech, and 
 include apostrophe, personification (prosopopma), 
 rhetorical question, and other means of enlivening 
 a speech and captivating an audience. 
 
 His second main topic, 'action,' which deals with 
 suitable delivery, had been valued up to this time, 
 but had not been explicitly taught. With Ramus this 
 subject comprises the use of the voice and gestures. 
 Under the head of vocal control, he discusses how, 
 both in the case of single words and of sentences or 
 combinations of words, expression may be given 
 through proper modulation to the various emotions, 
 such as fear, grief, and sympathy. Under the other 
 division he deals with all the details of effective ex- 
 pression through gestures with the body, head, eyes, 
 arms, hands, and fingers, and with the kind of 
 gesticulation to be avoided. 
 
 The rhetoric of Ramus may be outlined as more 
 fully indicated in the analysis on the next page. 
 
138 
 
 tETER RAMUS 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 139 
 
 Here, as in grammar, we find a clear and careful 
 selection of the subject matter according to his 
 three principles for content and his method of 
 'dichotomy.' Rhetoric is strictly limited to the 
 outer clothing of speech, and Ramus is absolutely 
 silent about invention, arrangement, memorizing, 
 parts of speech, syntactical construction, and all 
 kindred topics that might seem to overlap dialectic 
 and grammar. His position in abbreviating the 
 material is again most radical. In comparison 
 with the ancient writers and even his humanistic 
 contemporaries, at first sight he gives the impression 
 of scantiness and inadequacy. This is most apparent 
 in the case of Melanchthon, who so closely approached 
 him in grammar,^ but whose rhetoric held fast to all 
 the traditional matter, especially as presented by 
 Quintilian. The attitude of Ramus, however, is here 
 consistent with his point of view in the other liberal 
 arts, and he defends it on the score of good pedagogy. 
 He is actuated by the principle of not overburdening ' 
 the youth early in school life with a lot of abstract 
 conceptions that mean little or nothing to him. His 
 preference is to give him only such elements as can 
 easily be grasped and leave all the rest to practice 
 
 * See pp. 131 f. 
 
14© PETER RAMUS 
 
 through reading. However, as we shall see/ it 
 is only by means of dialectic that rhetoric attains 
 to real completion. 
 
 The method that Ramus advocated for teaching 
 rhetoric, which was to be carried out in the fourth year 
 of the course, was similar to that of grammar. It 
 consisted in a close combination of theory and prac- 
 tice. In 'explanation,' rules were progressively laid 
 down, and 'practice' in them was afterward attained 
 by the twofold process of 'analysis' and 'genesis.'^ 
 The pupil obtained some practice by analyzing the 
 authors that had become known during his three 
 years in grammar, but the model for the right use 
 of the voice and gesticulation the teacher had him- 
 self to furnish, since a literary passage is necessa- 
 rily silent on these points. Wherever he could, the 
 instructor quoted from actual speeches, and called 
 attention to the laws of the art. He asked whether 
 this kind of speech, that modulation of the voice, 
 and such and such gestures, were most fitting. Even 
 more than in the other arts, the spoken word was of 
 the utmost importance, and for that reason the 
 teacher had to be a practical orator, as well as 
 
 ^ See p. 148. 
 
 'See pp. 117 and 133. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 141 
 
 versed in the precepts of rhetoric' After the 
 'analysis,' 'genesis' in this subject was secured by 
 working out a theme for delivery, at first according to 
 a definite model and later with greater independence. 
 To guard against superficiality, Ramus advised, as 
 the ancient rhetoricians^ had, that the oration be 
 written down before it was delivered. While in the 
 year devoted to rhetoric Ramus thought it an error 
 to repeat the material acquired in grammar, he strove 
 to see that the pupil did not lose the fruit of his ear- 
 lier work. The teacher of rhetoric was to insist that 
 pure speech be observed and thus amalgamate the 
 result of both arts. This method of economy Ramus 
 calls 'combined use,' and energetically defends its 
 advantages against the protests and even the abuse 
 of the conservatives.^ 
 
 But the soul of the system and the true renown of 
 Ramus rest in his reconstruction of dialectic. Said 
 he himself: "If I had to pass judgment upon my 
 own works, I should desire that the monument raised 
 to my memory should commemorate the reform of 
 logic." ■* For it was his improvements in this sub- 
 
 ^Schol. rheL, XVIII, 381. 
 ^ Schol. dial., XK, 60^. 
 » See pp. 159 and 165. 
 * Dialediccs libri duo, Preface. 
 
142 ' PETER RAMUS 
 
 ject that started the reformation that Ramus made 
 in all the other liberal arts and served as his founda- 
 tion for their organization. It gave his system and 
 his texts an honorable position up to the eighteentli 
 century, and has always constituted his most endur- 
 ing title to the esteem of philosophers, scholars, 
 and educators. The success of these reforms was won 
 only after a long and stubborn fight, since dialectic 
 had dominated all the medieval fields of knowledge 
 and its grip upon the academic world was practically 
 identical with that of Aristotle. For three centuries 
 the cultural centers had been offering instruction in 
 the Organon enlarged by the medieval commentaries, 
 and had mixed its positions in with grammar, 
 rhetoric, and metaphysics. Dialectic and other sub- 
 jects had in consequence become a mere formal- 
 ism, empty, dry, and much too difficult for youthful 
 minds. The pupils became lost in the labyrinths. No 
 effort was made by dialectic instruction to find truth 
 or to prepare for life, but the end and aim was to 
 prepare for school disputations. The humanists had 
 tried hard to overcome this barren condition of logic, 
 and, before the time of Ramus, Valla had written 
 Dialectic Disputations, Agricola had produced his 
 work On the Institutes of Dialectic, and Vives had is- 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 43 
 
 sued his three books On the Transmission of Learning. 
 Although Paris remained faithful to the scholastic 
 dialectic, and the theological faculty in particular 
 opposed with all its might any sort of innovation, 
 these efforts of the humanists had paved the way 
 for independence of thought and the assertion of 
 common sense. It was, however, the more vig- 
 orous cultivation of the field by Ramus that was 
 largely the cause for the germination of the seed 
 which had been sown. 
 
 The dialectic reform of Ramus falls naturally 
 under the two heads which he himself distinguishes. 
 These relate to the destructive or 'refutative' side 
 of his work, in which he makes an examination of 
 the current dialectic and refutes the errors that 
 injure accuracy and proper arrangement in the 
 art; and to the constructive or 'demonstrative' 
 side, where he makes a dogmatic exposition of the 
 art of thinking. The former phase of his work 
 appears in its most extreme form in the Animadver- 
 sions upon Aristotle. As has been shown,^ he is 
 altogether too severe with Aristotle, failing utterly 
 to see the merit of his work, and accusing him of 
 obscurity, confusion, and contradiction, and even 
 1 See pp. 30 i. 
 
144 PETER RAMUS 
 
 of puerility and ineptitude. To excuse this vehe- 
 mence, we must recall the dogmatism of the times, the 
 stupidity and fanaticism of the defenders of Aris- 
 totle, and the intolerable yoke with which they were 
 endeavoring to burden all intelligence and love of 
 truth, science, and progress. But these ebullitions 
 of his youthful audacity were afterward somewhat 
 cooled. In later editions of the Animadversions he 
 was more moderate, and in his Stttdies on Dialectic 
 and the works that grew out of his contest with 
 Schegk he even shows a great admiration for Aris- 
 totle and professes to be a better Peripatetic than 
 his adversaries. 
 
 This milder tone is also shown in his borrowing 
 certain detached principles from Aristotle to shape 
 his own works. While Ramus never accepted the 
 system of Aristotle as a whole, we have seen ^ that 
 he at least obtained the laws by which he selected 
 his content in all studies, directly or indirectly, 
 from a treatise of that philosopher. These princi- 
 ples are consequently applied in the ' demonstrative ' 
 or expository side of his dialectic, which appears in a 
 succession of publications at different periods.^ The 
 
 ' See pp. no ff. 
 
 * E.g., DialectictB Partitiones or Institutiones, Dialectique, Dia- 
 lectics libri duo, and Scholce in liberales artes. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 145 
 
 scholastic works on dialectic in general use brought 
 into their subject matter parts that belonged rather 
 to other arts, such as grammar, rhetoric, and ethics, 
 but, subject to his three laws, Ramus confined his 
 material strictly to the art of thinking. 
 
 This discipline, he claimed, should be constituted 
 as nature teaches it, without regard to the prejudices 
 or opinions of men. It should be determined 
 according to our experience and observation of 
 reasoning in daily life, for the rules of thought 
 should be formulated after the fashion in which our 
 ordinary common sense solves problems. We should, 
 he states, thoroughly investigate how men use their 
 reason.^ The way of discovering this method of 
 nature is given at length in an early work: — 
 
 "Wherefore to understand the functioning of 
 reason, observe among the thousands of men those 
 most distinguished for their natural ability and 
 sagacity and suppose they have to give their advice 
 in the discussion of an important matter. Their 
 reasoning ought to give you an image of the nature 
 of reason, even as a faithful mirror. Examine, then, 
 what those advisers, through whom nature reveals 
 
 ' Cf . Vera logicce artis descriptio proficisci debet a naturalis rationis 
 et usus observatione {Schol. dial., XX, 941). 
 
146 PETER RAMUS 
 
 herself, wish to do. First, if 1 mistake not, they 
 will search silently in their minds for every possible 
 reason, and will invent every possible argument by 
 which to exhort you to undertake what is contem- 
 plated or to turn you from it. Then, when they have 
 found satisfactory arguments, they will express their 
 thought, not at random, but in order and methodi- 
 cally; not content with demonstrating each separate 
 point elegantly and forcefully, they will embrace the 
 question as a whole, descending from the most 
 general ideas to the individual and particular cases 
 falling under them. If this is their procedure in a 
 single discussion, there is the greater argument for 
 their following it when they study the nature of 
 reasoning in its entirety, as did the first philosophers, 
 who had no artificial logic at all. Hence at all 
 times that an occasion arises for exercising our rea- 
 son, nature invites our minds to a twofold effort : on 
 the one hand, greater activity and more penetration 
 for solving the problem ; and on the other more 
 calm reflection for examining and weighing that 
 solution and properly arranging its various parts. 
 Herein we recognize with certainty the action of 
 nature from which science should never depart, 
 but should follow religiously, for it will have fulfilled 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 47 
 
 its purpose only when it has reproduced the wisdom 
 of nature. Science ought, therefore, to study the 
 lessons that are innate in select minds; and then, 
 when it has collected them with care, it should in 
 turn transmit them in their most natural order, 
 and upon them as a model should formulate the 
 rules for those who desire to reason well. Thus 
 dialectic should, as it were, first be the pupil of 
 nature, but should later become her schoolmistress, 
 for nature is by no means so energetic and strong 
 that she cannot gain an advantage through under- 
 standing herself and recognizing her functions, nor 
 yet so feeble and languishing that she cannot, with 
 the help of this art, acquire greater power and in- 
 tensity."^ 
 
 Hence Ramus would base dialectic upon actual 
 experience and usage. As grammar and rhetoric 
 were to be founded upon the practice of those who 
 wrote and spoke well, dialectic is to take its principles 
 and rules from the procedure of those best fitted to 
 reason ; namely, the wise.^ His very practical dialec- 
 
 ^ DialecticcB partitiones, fol. 3, 4; Scholm dialectica, IV, pp. 
 146 fif. 
 
 '^ After this, we can better understand the significance of the 
 term 'utilitarian,' with which he was frequently taunted. See 
 P- 57- 
 
148 PETER RAMUS 
 
 j tic/ therefore, is more the art of persuasion and ex- 
 position than of the discovery of truth. With him 
 the subject leaned toward rhetoric, and could 
 better be learned, he held, by observing Cicero than 
 by studying the canons of the Organon.^ At the 
 outset of his treatises, he defines dialectic as 'the 
 art of discussing well,' ^ and from the two methods 
 we have just seen that he discerned in the reasoning 
 of the wise, it is divided into ' invention ' and ' arrange- 
 ment.' ^ The former division of the subject, which he 
 defines as that of inventing the arguments,'^ is con- 
 cerned with the separate parts of which the subject 
 is composed. The latter, defined as 'the suitable 
 arrangement of the things invented,' ^ deals with the 
 combination and classification of these parts in the 
 completed presentation. 
 
 ^ See pp. 154 f. ^ Hence Prantl calls it ' Ciceronian-rhetorical.' 
 
 ' Dialectica est ars bene dissereiidi is the opening of his Latin 
 treatises. 
 
 * Inventio and judicium (cf . Cicero) or dispositio. Dial, libri duo, 
 Book I, Chap. II ; Dialedique, p. 4. Here again his ' dichotomy ' 
 is in evidence. These are the main divisions, it will be noted, that 
 are usually assigned to rhetoric, but which Ramus discarded from 
 that subject. See p. 136. 
 
 ^ Pars de inveniendis argumentis or doctrina cogitandi et inve- 
 niendi argumenti. 
 
 ^ Apta rerum inventarum collocatio or parsde disponendis argu- 
 mentis ad judicandum. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM I |.0 
 
 'Invention' is separated into two main groups 
 of arguments, — 'artificial,' which are demonstrated, 
 and 'inartificial,' which are assumed.^ Under these 
 heads, Ramus arranges all the chief forms of argu- 
 ment into which human thought falls, and illustrates 
 them with examples from the classical poets and 
 orators. Of the artificial arguments the first four 
 are based on (i) causes, which are to be distinguished 
 as 'efficient,' 'material,' 'formal,' and 'final' ;^ (2) 
 effects; (3) 'subjects' or presuppositions,^ and 
 (4) adjuncts.^ These all come under the head of 
 agreeing,^ but there are also disagreeing ^ arguments ; 
 among which are included (5) 'different' and 'op- 
 posed.' Besides these five groups, which are all 
 simple, there are (6) compound arguments. While 
 these groups are 'primary,' there are also 'secondary' 
 
 * Argumentutn est artificiale aut inartificiale. Artificiale, quod 
 ex se arguit. 
 
 ^ These classes of causes are borrowed from Aristotle. 
 
 * The word used is subjecta (Aristotle's v7roK€Lfj.€va) . Ramus thus 
 explains it : subjectum est, cut aliquid conjungitur. Anima est 
 subjectum scientm, ignorantice, virtutis, vitii; quia hac prater 
 essentiam accedunt. 
 
 * Adjunctiim est, cui aliquid subjicitur. 
 
 ^ Consentaneum est quod consentit cum re quant arguit. 
 
 * Dissentanea is used here. Like consentanea, it is borrowed 
 from Cicero and indicates again the leaning of his dialectic toward 
 rhetoric. 
 
150 PETER RAMUS 
 
 arguments. The latter are distinguished as (7) quali 
 tative,^ which relate to names rather than things and 
 may be connotative and denotative, (8) distributive, 
 or (9) definitive. The second main division of the 
 classes of arguments, 'inartificial' or (10) assumed, - 
 embraces 'divine' and 'human' testimonies that 
 have been inherited, and these may be further 
 divided, the one as it comes from oracles or proph- 
 ecies, and the other from actual laws or from the 
 sanction of proverbs. 
 
 The second book treats the second part of dialectic, 
 — 'arrangement.' Here also is a twofold division, — 
 the 'axiom' or proposition,^ and the 'dianoia' or 
 deduction."* Deduction is itself divided into syllo- 
 gism and 'method.' There several divisions of the 
 propositions are suggested, but it is sufficient to 
 note here its ' quality ' as affirmative or negative, and 
 its 'quantity' as general or special. The syllogism 
 consists in deriving a conclusion from a ' proposition ' 
 
 1 Notatio (Aristotle's o-v/jl/SoXov or av^vyov) est nominis interpre- 
 tatio. 
 
 - These categories for reducing the terms of thought to ten chief 
 classes were borrowed from Aristotle. 
 
 ^ Axioma est dispositio argumenti cum argumento, qua esse ali- 
 quid aut non esse judicatur. Latine, enunciatum dicitur. 
 
 * Dianoia est cum aliud ex alio deducitur. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 15I 
 
 and an 'assumption,' or a major and minor premise. 
 It includes two classes, — the ' simple ' or categorical 
 and the 'conjunctive' or conditional, the latter of 
 which is divided into hypothetical and disjunctive. 
 The categorical syllogism, which consists in a 
 judgment derived from two simple propositions, is 
 divided according to quantity and quality into 
 fourteen 'modes.' These correspond to those of 
 the first three 'figures' in Aristotle, as Ramus rejects 
 the fourth figure, with its five modes, as invalid. 
 The hypothetical and disjunctive syllogisms, so 
 named from the nature of their premises, have 
 each two modes, one of which leads to positive 
 conclusions and the other to negative. Ramus also 
 explains the meaning of several other forms of the 
 syllogism, — enthymeme, induction, example, di- 
 lemma, and sorites, through which false conclusions 
 are derived. To the enthymeme and the sorites he 
 grants a certain validity, but the syllogisms cited, 
 he declares in closing, are 'the golden rule' by which 
 the good, just, true, useful, and their opposites can 
 be judged. 
 
 'Method,' the other form of deduction, is defined 
 as " the arrangement of a variety of arguments so that 
 the first in importance is placed first, the second next, 
 
152 PETER RAMUS 
 
 the third in the third place, and so on in order." 
 This process is divided into the method of ' learning ' 
 and that of 'sagacity.' There is apparently no 
 difference in their origin, nature, and purpose, but 
 they represent one and the same method in two fields 
 and compose simply a twofold phase of one process. 
 The method of 'learning' is strongly scientific, and 
 follows the laws of logic, going from definitions and 
 general principles to the distribution and special 
 arrangement of parts. Just as this method is used 
 in the liberal arts, 'sagacity' is the corresponding 
 form among poets, orators, and historians. In the 
 latter case the method is not in logical form, but 
 is thoroughly natural and comes simply from the 
 application of reason and wisdom. The chapters ^ 
 in which this whole subject is treated are regarded 
 by Ramus as the most important part of his dialec- 
 tic works. In one place he says : — 
 
 "But 'method,' both in the form of 'learning' 
 and of 'sagacity,' is the sovereign light of reason. 
 In this not only have the other animals nothing in 
 common with men, as they may have in the 'proposi- 
 tion,' but even men differ very widely among them- 
 
 1 Dialectics libri duo, Book II, Chaps. XVII and XVIII ; Dialec- 
 tiquc, pp. 119 ff. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 53 
 
 selves in the qualification. For, however much they 
 may all naturally share in the syllogistic faculty, 
 the number of those who study how to use it well is 
 very small, and of that small number there are still 
 fewer who know how to arrange and judge according 
 to good 'method.' By as much as man surpasses 
 the beasts in the syllogism, may he himself excel 
 other men through 'method,' and the divinity of 
 man is reflected in no part of reason so fully as in the 
 sum of that universal method of judgment." ^ 
 
 Evidently, Ramus holds, the way taken in wise 
 deliberation is from general to particular, and the 
 reader especially meets this 'method' in literature, 
 since the author necessarily struggles to be clear and 
 develop his material in proper sequence. If ' method ' 
 be neglected in either science or practical life, con- 
 fusion ensues. Since this method forms a clear 
 arrangement of material, it assists a natural develop- 
 ment of the pupil's memory, and, in consequence, 
 the second book closes with a chapter on this mental 
 function. In this Ramus introduced the first rules 
 on memory that ever appeared in a work on the art 
 of thinking, but they were little developed here. 
 
 An idea of the treatment of dialectic by Ramus may 
 ^ Dialeciiqtie, p. 135. 
 
154 PETER RAMUS 
 
 be gained from the abbreviated analysis on the next 
 page. It can easily be seen that the great contri- 
 butions of Ramus to the study of dialectic were brev- 
 ity, simplicity, and clearness. As a corresponding 
 failing, his system has been supposed to be somewhat 
 superficial. But logic with him was not the science 
 of the normative laws of human knowledge. He 
 lield it to be simply the practical art of debating 
 a question, and whatever subject matter is not needed 
 for his purpose, he rejects from his treatise. He de- 
 clines to consider any of the fundamental ontological 
 or epistemological problems that are often thought 
 to be preliminary to logic. He even refuses to use 
 the word 'concept' {notio), since it seems to him 
 too philosophic, and simply speaks of 'arguments.' 
 Logic for him deals not with the discovery of truth 
 so much as with exposition and persuasion, and he 
 is inclined to make dialectic lean toward rhetoric.^ 
 This, however, grew out of his desire to produce a 
 practical and useful dialectic, as opposed to the formal 
 
 ' This accounts for the criticisms of some of his contemporaries, 
 who declared that he was another Erasistratus and an ignoramus, 
 and that he wished to teach his pupils to fly without wings. See 
 Schegk, Hyperaspistes ad epistolam P. Rami, pp. 4 ff. ; Ursinus, 
 Bedenken ob Rami Dialectica in Schulen einzufuhren (Heidelberg, 
 1586). 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 
 
 155 
 
 o 
 •2.§ 
 
 .a So 
 
 c« 0..2 
 
 
 l-^v 
 
 .0 Ml 
 
156 PETER RAMUS 
 
 definitions, minute analyses, and barren rules of the 
 scholastic treatises, and such a simplification and 
 clarity in presenting the technique of the art of 
 thinking was of much value to education. More- 
 over, his conception of dialectic would tend to foster 
 free thought and inquiry, and harmonize the rules 
 of thinking with nature. To be sure, he sought 
 these principles of thought in the works of the great 
 classical writers, rather than in his o^vn reflection, 
 and so may have somewhat aided the formalized 
 humanism eventually to establish a new yoke upon 
 intellectual progress, but in his time he must have 
 been a great factor in freeing education from the 
 tyranny of a scholastic conception of Aristotle and 
 in breaking with the barbarism of the Middle Ages. 
 Through his dialectic he dared to tackle the philo- 
 sophic positions accepted unquestioningly for several 
 centuries and to resist the absurd distinctions of the 
 schoolmen. He made it clear that it was time to de- 
 part from the tutelage of Aristotle, and to this extent 
 he is still contributing to the advancement of the 
 science of logic. For, as has well been said,^ "he alone 
 dared to say openly and without reserve what others 
 only lisped ; he alone realized what they scarcely 
 
 ^ Brucker, Hist. crit. philos., Per. Ill, pars II, 1. II, c. i, § 2. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 57 
 
 dared to wish, in his preparation of a new dia- 
 lectic." 
 
 Ramus deals also with the method of teaching 
 dialectic, which is to occupy the pupils during the 
 fifth year of the course. As in grammar and rhetoric, 
 he insisted upon 'practice' as of more importance 
 even than 'explanation.' His opponents, he main- 
 tained, were teaching only 'dead logic,' and were 
 using the precepts of the art for a game of ball over 
 which to shout and quarrel, and he declared that 
 their sophistic disputations over dialectic theses 
 were not only fruitless, but injurious. Just as the 
 content was to follow 'nature,' 'practice' should 
 follow the mastery of content.^ The teacher should 
 make an 'explanation' of the logical rules, as con- 
 tained in 'invention' and 'arrangement,' and the 
 pupil should learn and discuss them, but the matter 
 could not stop there. The knowledge of the classes 
 of arguments and the forms of judgment must be 
 zealously applied, if it is to be of value. 
 
 The material here also, as in the preceding arts, is 
 to be furnished by the classical writers, especially 
 Cicero and Demosthenes. With his conception of 
 
 * Dial, partil., fol. i, ars igitur naturam sibi proposilam semper 
 habeat, exercitatio artem. 
 
156 PETER RAMUS 
 
 dialectic, he naturally turns to the orators for illus- 
 trations, but he is no longer satisfied with mere 
 excerpts. To understand their argumentation, whole 
 speeches are laid before the student. As elsewhere, 
 in 'practice' 'analysis' comes first; the arguments 
 are picked out and classified, and the cases of 'syllo- 
 gism ' and ' method ' have their ' figures ' and ' modes ' 
 determined. Then 'practice' in 'genesis,' or pro- 
 duction, must be afforded, during which the student 
 writes first a close imitation of the passage, and later 
 makes a more independent production.' Ramus 
 furnishes several illustrations of his entire method. 
 For example, wc may take the speech of Cicero, 
 For Milo. In the 'analysis,' he would first have 
 the defense read ; then the student should examine 
 all the arguments adduced and place them ac- 
 cording to the ten classes ; and finally determine 
 the 'premises,' 'conclusions,' and 'methods,' accord- 
 ing to which the arguments were arranged. In the 
 'genesis,' what Cicero urged in behalf of Milo is 
 applied in a similar theme. For example, a noble- 
 man is to be defended in an indictment for murder, 
 and the pupil has to seek and arrange the arguments 
 and conclusions in a fashion like that of Cicero. 
 
 1 See pp. 117, 13J, and 140. 
 
THE CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE TRIVIUM 1 59 
 
 Gradually, however, he should strive not to imi- 
 tate the great Roman orator slavishly, but to 
 become as independent as possible and even to 
 surpass him. Throughout this training in dialectic, 
 while, in keeping with the law of 'justice,' there is 
 no repetition of grammar and rhetoric, no part of 
 the instruction of the previous four years is to be 
 neglected, and, according to his principle of 'com- 
 bined use,' ^ every exercise must be couched in correct 
 grammar and ornate language. 
 
 ^See p. 141. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 Content and Method of the Quadrivium 
 
 As we have indicated, Ramus was not satisfied 
 to limit his reforms to the lower trinity of liberal 
 arts. He soon turned his attention also to the 
 'esoteric' studies, or quadrivium, which in his day 
 still included the mathematical subjects of arith- 
 metic and geometry, together with music and astron- 
 omy as minor fields.^ Music had fallen into the 
 background and he never attempted to revive it. 
 Astronomy he included to some extent under his 
 wider term of 'physics.' 
 
 To mathematics, however, Ramus gave great at- 
 tention, and the results of his labors here are worthy 
 of more detailed consideration than could be given 
 when deaUng with the account of his life. These 
 subjects have been so immensely expanded and im- 
 proved since his day that a mere inspection of his pro- 
 
 ^ See p. 1 20. Rami actiones duct in senatii, pro regia mathematics 
 professionis cathedra, published in two editions in 1566, and extant 
 also in CollectanccB prcefationes, epistolce, orationes, p. 533. 
 
 160 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRIVIUM l6l 
 
 ductions will give but a very inadequate notion of his 
 actual contribution. Up to the last quarter of the 
 fifteenth century, the texts on mathematics were lim- 
 ited to little more than those of the ancients and the 
 wretched condensations ^ made during the Middle 
 Ages, and while just before the close of the century 
 a few editions of Euclid had been published at 
 humanistic centers in Italy,^ little had been done 
 with the subject. The humanists who might have 
 collected and translated these treatises were largely 
 absorbed in the development of hnguistic study.^ 
 At the opening of the sixteenth century conditions 
 began to improve ; a number of earnest scholars 
 came into the field,* and several textbooks on mathe- 
 matics appeared in Germany, Italy, and France. 
 But while several prominent mathematicians were 
 developed at Paris before Ramus, he must still be 
 
 1 Paciuolo's work (1494) and Valla's edition (1498) were hardly 
 of this order, and there were a number of excellent modern works 
 on arithmetic pubHshed before 1501, such as those of Borghi and 
 Calandri. 
 
 ■' Such as the 1482 edition of Ratdolt in Venice, the 1491 edition 
 at Vincentia, and Valla's edition of 1498. 
 
 ' Even Sturm entirely ignored the subject in his curriculum. 
 
 * Faber Stapulensis, Clichtoveus, Bouvelles, Budaeus, Jean 
 Fernel, Oronce Finee, and Jacques Peletier were among those to 
 advance the subject before the work of Ramus began. 
 
1 62 PETER RAMUS 
 
 accounted a pioneer. Before his death he had be- 
 come one of the best-known mathematicians that 
 France possessed, and his reputation endured until 
 the time of Descartes. His works, too, compare 
 favorably with most of the others^ produced during 
 the entire century. As late as 1625, his arithmetic 
 was still in good standing, and it was, together with his 
 geometry and posthumous algebra, republished and 
 commented upon in France, Germany, Holland, and 
 throughout academic Europe. Moreover, his lectures 
 on the subject at the College of France brought 
 into existence a host of brilliant young mathema- 
 ticians, who became the means of stimulating an in- 
 terest and of greatly advancing the work during the 
 next half century, and at his death he left most of his 
 fortune to found a chair of mathematics at the College 
 of France. Hence his achievements, crude as they 
 were, entitle him to an honorable place in the history 
 of mathematics. 
 
 The special interest that Ramus showed in mathe- 
 matics was probably due not only to his appreciation 
 of the subject as a means of mental discipline and as 
 a key to many practical pursuits, but equally to its 
 definiteness and the possibility of illustrating thereby 
 
 1 Viete's incomparable work would have to be excepted. 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRIV^IUM 1 6 
 
 O 
 
 the three rules he had laid down for determining the 
 content of a subject.' He held that the laws of 
 'justice' and 'wisdom' had been violated, and that 
 too much complexity and obscurity appeared in the 
 current works on mathematics, and even in Aristotle. 
 Ramus declares that the great philosopher mingled 
 much of the subject matter of arithmetic with that 
 of geometry, and treated geometry before arithmetic, 
 although this forced him to repeat certain general 
 conceptions, such as 'size,' under several heads. 
 Most of these difficulties for mathematics could be 
 avoided, he insists, by sharply separating the fields of 
 the subjects and by treating all general conceptions 
 first.2 
 
 Ramus declares the subject matter of arithmetic 
 to be that 'of proper calculation.' ^ He divides it as 
 'simple' and 'comparative' or compound, and de- 
 votes a book to each class. "The simple arithmetic 
 considers the nature of numbers singly," while "com- 
 parative arithmetic treats the comparison of numbers 
 in quantity and quality." The former includes no- 
 
 1 Schol. Math., prof., in Collect, prcsf., p. i66. 
 
 « Schol. Math., I, pp. 2 ff. 
 
 ' Arithmetics est doctrina bene numerandi. This seems to be 
 the only one of the arts where ars is not used, but this is probably 
 accidental, as is shown by Dialectica, lib. I, cap. III. 
 
164 PETER RAMUS 
 
 tation, the four fundamental operations, fractions, 
 and improper numbers ; the latter deals with 
 arithmetical and geometrical proportion, the rule 
 of three ('golden rule'), alligation, equations, and 
 allied topics. Geometry he calls ' the art of measur- 
 ing properly.' The subject falls naturally into plane 
 and solid, but the division into twenty-seven books 
 treats the subject from the standpoint of separate 
 topics rather than of groups. His treatise on plane 
 geometry covers lines, angles, and such figures 
 as triangles, quadrangles, polygons, parallelograms, 
 squares, and circles, together with their relations 
 and subdivisions; that on solid geometry covers 
 the properties and subdivisions of pyramids, prisms, 
 cubes, spheres, cones, and cylinders. 
 
 The diagrams on the following pages, giving more 
 detail, show how carefully Ramus observed his fun- 
 damental principles in the content of mathematics, 
 and how both arithmetic and geometry could be 
 divided according to his favorite method of ' dichot- 
 omy.' While by his clear presentation he may have 
 sacrificed something of the rigorous discipline that 
 has been claimed by some as the chief value in the 
 study of mathematics, he felt clearness to be of most 
 importance and ruthlessly eliminated all extraor- 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRIVIUM 105 
 
 dinary complexity. The order and simplicity of his 
 arrangement are admirable, and his demonstrations 
 are clear and easily remembered. We are further 
 indebted to him as perhaps the first to put the 
 problems of Euclid in the form of propositions and 
 theorems, which has proven such a boon for the 
 memory. 
 
 The method of teaching which Ramus advocated 
 for mathematics was quite as effective as that in the 
 other subjects, and was based on the same principles. 
 After the rules had been explained as simply as 
 possible, the pupil's knowledge was put in practice. 
 Here again he stressed the process of 'analysis' and 
 'genesis.' The examples were to be borrowed from 
 the mathematical writings of the ancients, chiefly 
 Euclid, or formed by the teacher himself. In geome- 
 try the figures were first to be drawn by the instructor 
 and then imitated by the student.^ Again, in order 
 that the work of the trivium might not be forgotten, 
 he advised that discussions be held upon mathe- 
 matical theses, and that the arguments and diction 
 used be held to a high standard of efficiency. 
 
 We may now turn to the other quadrivial subject 
 upon which Ramus wrote. Until his time, 'physics,' 
 ^ See PrcBf. math., in the Colled, pmf., p. 166. 
 
1 66 
 
 PETEK KAMUS 
 
 •I I i|J 
 
 SS = S 3 o- 
 
 
 :3 0^ 0> u 
 
 & 
 
 .2 
 
 '^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 3 
 
 > 
 
 H 
 
 ■u! 
 
 & B a a 
 
 .5 o .s 3 
 
 s -s -a •« 2 
 ^ ^ 3 -. c 
 
 I ^ - §-g 
 
 2i ■§ ■*• 
 
 S - fl 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRTV'IUM 
 
 167 
 
 ta Ell € 
 
 ^ ^ rt c ^.H tj "5 — 'w 
 
 flT3 
 
 iSJ 
 
 9- S 
 
 as 
 
 -9 > I 
 
 •S -5 
 
 
 4J 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 .0 
 
 
 •S'-g 
 
 a 
 
 
 s 
 
 .y 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 ■" ».13 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 raigl- 
 liqu 
 rpen 
 ralle 
 
 £ 
 
 
 h 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 U3 
 
 
 8^ 
 
 04 '2;= 
 
 S 3 3 S-^ 
 Sja a 2 a 
 
1 68 PETER RAMUS 
 
 like mathematics, played a decidedly subordinate 
 part in the colleges of the university. And neither in 
 his day nor for a long time afterward was it generally 
 dignified with careful organization or methodical 
 instruction. Even the humanists, since natural 
 science lay quite outside their sphere of interest, 
 did little or nothing to disturb the authority of 
 Aristotle in this field,^ although they tried to disrupt 
 the traditional scholastic methods and the super- 
 stitions of astrology. Ramus undertook to intro- 
 duce the same system into the content and method 
 of physics as he had in the case of the other liberal 
 arts. He vigorously attacked both the schoolmen 
 and Aristotle, and criticized the eight books of the 
 latter's work on natural science - in the same number 
 of Studies in Physics:' He claimed that this treatise 
 of the great philosopher secured its material more 
 from logic than from nature, and that Aristotle 
 indulged in too many speculations, which ha\e 
 nothing to do with the field of physics. With some 
 exaggeration, he says : — 
 
 "If one should by means of his senses and reason 
 investigate heaven and earth and all that therein is, 
 
 ^ Witness Melanchthon's InstitiUiones physicce. 
 * ^wiKq 'Ak/oouo-is- ' ScholcR physicts. 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRIV^IUM 169 
 
 as a physicist ought to do, and then compare his 
 results with the Physics of Aristotle, he would find 
 in that work no observation of anything in nature, 
 but only sophisms, theoretical speculations, and un- 
 supported assertions." ^ 
 
 The proper method, he held, is quite contrary to 
 Aristotle's. One should develop the subject of 
 physics by avoiding philosophical digressions and 
 searching with his senses through visible nature, 
 where lies the genuine and useful material, which 
 needs only to be observed, tested, and arranged 
 methodically for instruction. 
 
 However, this invective against senseless and 
 pernicious abstractions and the suggestion of a real 
 investigation of nature must not mislead us into 
 supposing that Ramus himself held to induction in 
 natural science. In building up his physics he did 
 not resort directly to nature for his material, but, 
 similarly to his method with the literary and argu- 
 mentative arts, he took his facts largeh^ from the 
 Physics of Aristotle, the Natural History of Pliny, 
 and the Georgics of Vergil. And the order of ar- 
 rangement is as deductive as it is in his geometry. 
 His Studies in Physics tell us that the "aim of 
 }Pr<zjat. physica, in the Collectan. prcefai., p. 69. 
 
170 PETER RAlVroS 
 
 genuine natural science is to study first the heavens, 
 then the meteors, then the minerals, vegetables, 
 animals, and finally man." Physics deals with 
 nature, which is an 'essence constant in itself.' ^ 
 'God' and 'intelligence' (mens) are assigned as the 
 chief principles underlying nature, but are not 
 further mentioned, since he rigidly eschews meta- 
 physical discussions, and he quickly turns to the 
 material world. After a very brief chapter upon 
 forms of matter in motion, — birth, death, growth, 
 decay, and the like, he takes up astronomy and 
 deals with the heavenly bodies, zones, poles, zodiac, 
 chronology, and temperature. The heavenly bodies 
 are discussed under the first element, — 'fire.' The 
 three remaining elements include all natural phe- 
 nomena. His chapter on 'air' deals with clouds, 
 thunder and lightning, hail, winds, and rains. Then 
 from the phenomena of the air he goes to 'water,' 
 under which he considers oceans, rivers, springs, 
 and wells. Finally, he deals with the 'earth,' in- 
 cluding the stones and metals in its bosom, and 
 the plants, animals, and men that thrive upon it. 
 The outline on page 172, which is taken from a 
 
 * Naiura est essentia per se constans. 
 
CONTENT AND METHOD OF THE QUADRIVIUM 171 
 
 summar}^ of his lectures by one of his pupils/ will 
 give some idea of the classification of the subject. 
 
 Thus in selecting the subject matter for his 
 physics Ramus treats the supersensible cursorily and 
 devotes himself almost exclusively to visible ob- 
 jects. He purposely rejects h>potheses and specu- 
 lations. Astronomy, meteorology, and agriculture 
 occupy the bulk of his work, but considerable atten- 
 tion is also given to botanical, zoological, and anthro- 
 pological material. Very clearly, however, he has 
 investigated none of these topics for himself, but has 
 relied upon the records of the classical authors. His 
 great contribution rests in his substantial and objec- 
 tive treatment, free from all the philosophic theories 
 of the times, and in his excellent organization and 
 clear arrangement, which passes down from the 
 heavenly bodies and the phenomena of the air to the 
 earth with its organic and inorganic features, and 
 realizes its aim and end in man. 
 
 This work in physics, which was planned for the 
 seventh and final year of the course, was to be taught 
 like the other arts, by 'practice,' including 'analysis' 
 and 'genesis,' as well as by 'explanation.' Unfor- 
 
 ^ Profess io rcgia (pp. 285 ft".), published by Freigius four years 
 after the death of Ramus. 
 
172 
 
 PETER RAMUS 
 
 tunately, the real spirit of science and induction was 
 as yet so little understood that the student gained 
 this exercise through an interpretation of the descrip- 
 tions of various classical authors rather than by 
 actual observation, and the study became verbal 
 rather than scientific. But, compared with the texts 
 of the time, the physics of Ramus must have pre- 
 sented an admirable body of well-arranged material 
 and must have proved more interesting and easier 
 to learn. 
 
 
 Immaterial { 9°^„. 
 
 I intelligence 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' birth and death 
 growth and decay 
 alteration 
 
 
 
 matter m motion 
 
 
 
 
 change of place 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f constant ( ^^'^ 
 I stars 
 
 
 
 
 simple 
 
 
 
 ' fire 
 
 Physics, 
 dealing with 
 ' nature, an 
 essence con- 
 stant in 
 itself,' 
 includes : 
 
 Mate- 
 rial 
 
 dasset 
 
 elements 
 
 ino 
 
 inconstan 
 rganic or 
 
 t 
 air 
 
 air 
 
 water 
 , earth 
 
 clouds 
 
 thunders 
 
 lightnings 
 
 hails 
 
 winds 
 
 rains 
 
 
 
 
 com- 
 
 ' meteors ' 
 
 
 oceans 
 
 
 
 
 posite 
 of ele- 
 
 
 water 
 
 rivers 
 springs 
 
 
 
 
 ments 
 
 
 
 wells 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f stones 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 earth metals 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <■ colors 
 
 
 
 
 
 t plants 
 
 
 
 
 
 organic ] animals and beasts 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ma 
 
 n 
 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 Higher and Professional Studies 
 
 When Ramus retired from active teaching in 157 1, 
 it was understood that, in continuing his reform of 
 the Hberal arts, he would include treatises on ethics 
 and politics, which were coming to be added in the 
 higher curriculum of the quadrivium} It is even 
 stated that he had prepared a work upon the subject 
 of ethics, which awaited only a final revision, when 
 death cut short his literary activities.^ If this 
 treatise was ever published or even produced, how- 
 ever, it has now been lost, and we have to depend 
 upon other works of his for our knowledge of his 
 moral teachings. Happily his references to the sub- 
 ject elsewhere are so extensive that it is not difficult 
 to reconstruct his general positions. His polemics 
 are developed in occasional outbursts against Aris- 
 totelianism in his orations and more systematically 
 
 ' See p. 120. 
 
 ^ Referred to in his Oratio de professione liberalium artiutn. (Paris, 
 1563.) Seep. 104. 
 
 173 
 
174 PETER RAMUS 
 
 in his Studies in Metaphysics. His constructive 
 attitude in pure ethics is found in the treatise On the 
 Customs of the Ancient Gauls, although this was in- 
 tended to be more of an historical work than a trea- 
 tise on morals, and his positions as a Christian ethi- 
 cist are developed in the second and third books of 
 his posthumous Commentaries on the Christian Re- 
 ligion. 
 
 The ethical attitude of Ramus in many places is 
 purely anti- Aristotelian and destructive. He fails 
 somewhat to understand Aristotle, but as an ardent 
 Christian he evidently holds it incumbent upon him 
 to combat the paganism of that philosopher. Like 
 most theologians until a very recent day, he proves 
 a naive dualist. He cannot conceive of ethics with- 
 out the direct action of God upon the human soul. 
 Hence he inveighs against the scholastic instruction 
 in x\ristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, "where the boy 
 learns a mass of impieties : for example, that the 
 principle and ideals of ' the good ' are innate in every 
 man, that all the virtues are within his own power, 
 that he acquires them by means of nature, art, and 
 labor, and that for this work, so grand and so sublime, 
 man has need of neither the aid nor the cooperation 
 of God. Nothing about providence; not a word 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 75 
 
 about divine justice ; in short, since, in the eyes of 
 Aristotle, souls are mortal, the happiness of man is 
 reduced to this perishable life." "Such," he ex- 
 claims, "is the philosophy out of which we build the 
 foundation of our religion!"^ In fact, to the in- 
 genuous mind of Ramus, Aristotle's very idea of God 
 savors of atheism. In another connection he de- 
 clares at length : — 
 
 " God, according to Aristotle, is an eternal essence, 
 which knows not matter, magnitude, parts, division, 
 passion, or change, and leads a perfect and com- 
 pletely happy existence. Even if this be granted, 
 what a further mass of errors and impieties ! God 
 is an animal ; there are as many gods as there are 
 celestial globes. God has no real power whatsoever ; 
 he would not know how to act or move, had he 
 not possessed those characteristics from all eternity. 
 God is the first cause of the world, but without wish- 
 ing or even knowing it. He thinks only of himself 
 and disdains all the rest. He is neither ' creator ' 
 nor 'providence.' He moves the world eternally 
 even as the loadstone moves iron. He has neither 
 love, benevolence, nor charity. What, then, is such 
 
 ' Pro phUosophica Parisiensis Academice disciplina oratio. See 
 Collectanea prcsfationes, epistola, orationes, pp. 337 f. 
 
176 PETER RAMUS 
 
 an atheistic conception of God save a Titanic strug- 
 gle against him ? " ^ 
 
 Such is the vehemence with which Ramus ordina- 
 rily attacks the foundations of Aristotle's ethics, but 
 at times he shows that the ancient philosopher had 
 anticipated the true Christian doctrine and accepts 
 his positions, even at the expense of certain usages 
 of the Church. For example, after showing that 
 Aristotle completely rejected the gods made in the 
 image of man, he remarks that "this philosopher, 
 pagan though he was, has therein shown himself 
 more pious than a great many Christians, who place 
 in their temples visible and gross images of the Trin- 
 ity, of which even the mind can scarcely conceive." ^ 
 Occasionally he goes so far as to claim to rely abso- 
 lutely upon reason, and "not even to employ any 
 argument drawn from the Holy Scriptures, nor 
 appeal to the authority of Christ and Moses." ^ 
 His commentary on the institutions and customs 
 of the ancient Gauls, which is outlined on page 
 179, treats ethics from the standpoint of the four 
 
 ' Schol. met., I. XIV, at the close. 
 
 2 Ibid., 1. XII, cap. 8. Cf. ScM. phys., 1. VIII, toward the 
 end. 
 
 ' Schol. phys., 1, VIII, at the close. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 77 
 
 cardinal virtues and almost in the terms of Plato 
 and Cicero. 
 
 As a rule, however, Ramus does not desire any 
 such complete emancipation. In the treatment of 
 ethics in his Commentaries on the Christian Religion 
 he is a true Protestant Christian, and bases his solu- 
 tion of ethical problems upon the Scriptures, espe- 
 cially the decalogue and the Lord's prayer. Yet he 
 never hesitates to refer to examples from antiquity 
 in defense of his position, as well as to contrast them 
 with his conception of Christian ethics. As in- 
 stances of this, we may note his citation of the Lace- 
 daemonian and primitive Roman mandate to 'honor 
 thy father and mother,' of Cicero's and Menander's 
 prohibition of bearing 'false witness,' and of a variety 
 of pagan warnings against ' covetous ' action and even 
 thought. He felt, of course, that the ancient world 
 was more in harmony with the later five command- 
 ments, which deal rather with man's social relations 
 and not so much with his reconciliation with God, 
 whereas the Christian world holds that primarily in 
 God, and not in ourselves, rests the motive for human 
 struggles and human happiness.^ He maintains at 
 the start, therefore, that the fundamental principle 
 
 ^ Commentaria de religione Christiana, II, 2-10. 
 
178 PETER RAMUS 
 
 of ethics is tuan's obedience to God and his desire to 
 submit to his will in all things.^ The means of bring- 
 ing God near and unifying him with man is 'faith' 
 in the Father's benefits to his church or kingdom 
 upon earth. 
 
 Then, through illustrations from the Sermon on the 
 Mount and quotations from other parts of the New 
 Testament, Ramus enlarges, deepens, and brings 
 out the inner meaning of each one of the command- 
 ments. He converts all these negative statements 
 into positive commands, and gives to the Old Tes- 
 tament form a New Testament content, thus produc- 
 ing from a code of statutes a system of Christian 
 ethics.^ In carrying this out, he states that all Chris- 
 tian duties and virtues can be embraced under "piety 
 and charity as the sum and substance of the law. 
 Charity is both the cause and effect of the law. It is 
 filled with faith, hope, and sympathy, and is void of 
 malice, pride, hatred, and injustice. It is the one 
 and all-comprehensive virtue." ^ From this root, 
 then, spring all the Christian virtues and all good 
 works. Content is accordingly given to these general 
 
 * Commentaria de religione Chrisliana, I, 2, 10 and I, i, 6 f. 
 ^ Ibid., II, 7, 229; II, 10, 179; and II, 11, 251. 
 
 * Ibid., II, 13, 202. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 
 
 179 
 
 M 
 I 
 
 Mi 
 
 o a 
 
 S"5 I >- 
 |2.agsg' 
 
 i I 
 
 
 
 si 
 
 2 — 
 
 a ^ a 
 
 s i 
 
 a S 
 
 "S := 
 
 I a 
 
 a 
 
l8o PETER RAMUS 
 
 principles in his treatment of all human relations.^ 
 Marriage, which is concerned in the seventh com- 
 mandment, Ramus outlines historically, beginning 
 with God's sanction of the relation in the case of 
 Adam and Eve, and citing Christ's approval by his 
 presence at the wedding feast in Cana and by the 
 symboHc marriage of Christ with the Church. He 
 further holds that marriage should take place only 
 between members of the Church. He specifies that it 
 should be forbidden between Christians and pagans 
 and within certain degrees of consanguinity, and cites 
 instances in the Bible where violations of this prin- 
 ciple have been punished. The Old Testament polyg- 
 amy cannot be taken as the norm, for the relation 
 was in its institution monogamous. Celibacy, how- 
 ever, is not holier than marriage, and he condemns the 
 requirement in the case of monks, nuns, and secular 
 priests. Divorce should be granted only on the 
 grounds of adultery. The rule for the relation of 
 parents and children Ramus finds in the fifth com- 
 mandment, and more specific guidance he gathers 
 from the Epistle to the Ephesians and the works of 
 various classical writers. He gives as a warning for 
 
 1 This forms the substance of the second book of his Commen- 
 taries. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIOiVAL STUDIES l8l 
 
 tlic violation of this law the punishments meted out 
 to Ham and to Absalom. In all social, civic, and 
 political life, Ramus stresses the duty of truth. He 
 will not sanction 'white lies,' concealment of the 
 truth by physicians, rhetorical turns of the orator, or 
 deceptions in diplomacy. If the truth must be 
 concealed, the proper way to achieve this is by silence 
 or by such an answer as mil produce silence on the 
 part of the questioner, as in the case of Jesus with the 
 Pharisees. Oaths are not unconditionally forbidden, 
 for Abraham, David, Paul, and other biblical models 
 swore in God's name when the circumstances called 
 for such action. In general, asseveration of this 
 sort should be permitted when made concerning the 
 truth, but should not be done wantonly in cursing or 
 in supporting falsehood through perjury. For this 
 latter grievous sin God has often punished men 
 severely. Ramus ranks tithe-taking with usury, and 
 brings them both under the eighth commandment, — • 
 not to steal. One may, however, increase his posses- 
 sions by all honorable means. Like the reformers 
 in general, this French moralist was very strict in 
 his ideas of amusements. Dancing, for example, he 
 would permit among young maidens by themselves, 
 as in the case of the sisters of Moses and their com- 
 
162 PETER RAMXTS 
 
 panions, but dancing with a member of the opposite 
 sex, in his opinion, was too often associated with 
 immoraHty. Obedience to magistrates was especially 
 counseled by Ramus, as implied in the fifth com- 
 mandment, but, on the other hand, magistrates must 
 live up to their duties. War and capital punishment, 
 he maintains, are somewhat limited in their extent 
 and character by the sixth com.mandment, although 
 they may be justified in the case of murder, unjust 
 attacks, or defense of one's native land. 
 
 After the detailed discussion of 'obedience' he 
 takes up the Christian duty of 'prayer.' ' This atti- 
 tude is an evidence of piety, and the other great proof 
 of faith. It is the gift of God himself, since it is he 
 that kindles the zeal for it in us, and his fatherly rela- 
 tion through Christ is justification for it in the faith- 
 ful soul. "Christ is our mouthpiece, through whom 
 we talk to the Father; our eye, through whom we 
 see him ; our right hand, through whom we make 
 offerings to him." - Hence it is the Father himself 
 who inspires us to prayer, and gives us in his son the 
 pledge of being heard. Prayer, therefore, is the ex- 
 
 1 To this subject he devotes the third book of his Commentaries, 
 just as the second was concerned with 'obedience to the divine law.' 
 . } Ibid., Ill, 2, 208ff. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 83 
 
 pression and proof of Christian life, and in it penitence 
 is revealed. As the new Ufe is expressed in prayer, 
 we are strengthened and advanced in the fight against 
 our evil inclinations. It is, therefore, necessary to 
 renew prayer daily and ask forgiveness for our sins, 
 since continual and manifold temptations are con- 
 stantly arising both from our misfortunes and our 
 prosperity.'^ He further makes a gradation in sins 
 from the standpoint of heinousness and worthiness 
 of punishment. The most unforgivable breach is 
 the sin against the Holy Ghost, as in the case of the 
 Pharisees that attributed the miracles of Jesus to 
 demons. - 
 
 The Lord's prayer Ramus holds to be a model 
 for all conditions of life, and the treatise on prayer 
 is clearly a detailed paraphrase and explanation of 
 its several petitions. It is not necessary to enter 
 further into his discussion, but it is of interest to note 
 the ingenious comparison that he makes between the 
 ten commandments and the various petitions of the 
 Lord's prayer. The second half of the prayer is 
 shown to correspond in general to the second half of 
 the decalogue. This analogy is not so much one that 
 is strained after in an effort to attract and hold the 
 ' Ibid., Ill, 8, 241 f. 2 ji^^^ III g 
 
1 84 PETER RAMUS 
 
 attention of the reader, as it is intended to convince 
 him that the Christian life, in fulfiUing the law, mani- 
 fests itself as in harmony with the benefits for which 
 we are bidden to ask.^ 
 
 It can thus be seen that the Ramian ethics, like 
 all treatises until the last half century, was essen- 
 tially dogmatic, and shades off into what may be 
 more properly called 'theology.' As a matter of 
 fact, Ramus includes both subjects in a single work, 
 his Four Books of Commentaries on the Christian 
 Religion? The two middle books, which have been 
 discussed, are really ethical and deal with ' obedience' 
 and 'prayer,' but the first and last, upon 'faith' and 
 'the sacraments' respectively, would come rather 
 under the head of theology. Yet, as compared with 
 the treatises of the times, especially those of the 
 orthodox Catholic authorities. Ramus is not guided 
 by dogmatism. He strives, like most of the reformed 
 theologians, to deliver the subject from all the idle 
 
 * lUd., Ill, lo, 249. 
 
 * This treatise was begun in Switzerland and Germany in 1 568- 
 1569, and the outline laid before the best known Protestant 
 theologians. It was completed upon the return of Ramus to Paris, 
 but was not published until four years after his death, when his 
 pupil, Banosius, got out an edition at Frankfurt. See pp. 95 and 
 96 f. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 85 
 
 questions and various subtleties with which the 
 scholastics had embarrassed it. He was disgusted 
 with the unfruitful learning, formal attitude, and 
 dissociation with life in the theology of the times, 
 and struggled to advocate upright living rather than 
 mere doctrine. He wished to make the Scriptures 
 the supreme rule of faith, and continually expressed 
 a wish for exact translations in both Latin and the 
 vernacular,^ but he stressed the knowledge of re- 
 vealed truths less than actually putting them into 
 effect. 
 
 His practical point of view is first embodied in his 
 definition of theology as 'the science of living well.' ^ 
 He further specifies that "the final purpose of the 
 science is not mere acquaintance with matters relat- 
 ing to it, but use and practice," and that by 'well 
 living' is meant "living in harmony and conformity 
 with God, the source of all good things." This 
 attitude in theology cannot but remind us again of 
 the reproach of being 'utilitarian' made by his 
 opponents,^ and of his definitions in the various 
 
 1 Illustrations of this desire were found in his Advice to the King 
 on the Reformation of the University and his letter to the Cardinal 
 of Lorraine in 1570. See pp. 84 and 103. 
 
 ^Comm. de relig. Christ., 1, i, 6. Cf. I, 25, 89. 
 
 » See p. 57. 
 
l86 PETER RAMUS 
 
 liberal arts.^ Ramus himself says: "In the same 
 way the liberal arts teach by their precepts to speak 
 correctly, to make an effective speech, to reason well, 
 to calculate well, and to measure well, respectively." 
 Hence, since theology should be of practical value, 
 he holds that it must not be filled with fine techni- 
 calities, but should be intelligible and popular. 
 "As I venerate and honor the mystery of sacred and 
 divine things, so I desire all instruction relating to 
 these matters to be free from the rocks and thorns of 
 scholastic problems, and clear and distinct in the 
 whole course of its exposition and treatment." - 
 The Scriptures hold a rich and manifold content of 
 divine revelation, prophecy, history, poetry, and 
 song, which may be made of infinite value to the 
 masses. This body of simple and inestimable truth 
 was praised most highly by the Christian Fathers, 
 but had been ignored and rejected by the scholastics. 
 "Wherefore," Ramus declares, "I think that this 
 recent darkness should be cast away as far as possi- 
 ble and the ancient light brought back." ^ 
 
 ' See pp. 124, 136, 148, 163, and 164. 
 
 - Comm. de. Relig. Christ., 1, preface, p. i. 
 
 ^ Ibid., I, preface, pp. 1 f. Cf. ibid., IV, 18, 343: "Let us dis- 
 miss the profane logomachies and empty^ talk; let us speak the 
 words of the Holy Scriptures, let us use the language of the Holy 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 187 
 
 111 order to restore this enlightenment, he proposes 
 a twofold method. In the first place, the text he 
 would make should be illustrated with suitable pas- 
 sages from the Holy Scriptures. "We must act in 
 divine matters," says he, "not otherwise than ac- 
 cording to the divine writings." ^ The Old Testa- 
 ment must be used as well as the New. Together 
 they form the rule for piety and offer the forgiveness 
 of sins through Christ. In the Old, the covenant is 
 promised ; in the New, it is granted. Both contain 
 a revelation of God and have substantially the same 
 content, although one is prophetic and veiled, and 
 the other fulfilled and clear.- Secondly, Ramus 
 would add to the text and sacred examples, passages 
 taken from the greatest classical poets, orators, and 
 historians. By this secular spicing of the religious 
 
 Spirit. For that is the truest doctor of wisdom and the most 
 renowned orator of eloquence, and it uses words that can be under- 
 stood by us, — clear, significant, and suitable. For that will be to 
 di v'ide the truth rightly. Then let us not supplant divine wisdom 
 and language with sophisms and folly." Similar is his continual 
 suggestion of a return to the ' golden Tige ' of primitive Christianity. 
 See ibid., 1, 6, 25; II, 9, 165; IV, 17, 338; IV, 18, 342 f.; IV, 19, 
 344, and 346 f. 
 
 ■ Ibid., I, preface, p. 5. 
 
 - See his comparison of the decalogue with the Lord's prayer, 
 pp. 183 f. 
 
l88 PETER RAMUS 
 
 materials he believes that the attention of the reader 
 can be attracted and stimulated, "not that any au- 
 thority or approbation for religion can be derived from 
 it, but that it may be clear Christian theology is 
 not so abstruse or so remote from the human senses 
 that it cannot illumine all people with a certain 
 natural light, and so its very humanity may invite 
 and allure men to engage in divine studies with eager- 
 ness." ^ This use of classical authors by Ramus, 
 which is not intended merely as a rhetorical illus- 
 tration of Christian truth, but a general attempt to 
 transmit its natural and supernatural revelation, is 
 one of the most interesting and characteristic features 
 of his theology. He constantly undertook to show 
 the harmony of the loftiest representatives of classi- 
 cal antiquity with Christian principles, to feel and 
 point out in the pre-Christian world prophecies of 
 Christianity, and to trace them up to the appearance 
 of the Gospel, not only from Moses and Isaiah, but 
 also from Plato and the academies of ancient philos- 
 ophy. In this he illustrates the complete recon- 
 ciliation of the Northern Renaissance with the 
 Reformation, and reveals himself a typical humanist 
 and a Protestant theologian. While he agrees in the 
 ^ Comm. de relig. Christ., preface, p, 2. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES iSq 
 
 essentials with the evangehcal principles of the other 
 reformers, in his position toward classical antiquity 
 he represents a peculiar breadth of view. 
 
 Upon this basis Ramus organizes the material of 
 his theology. He holds that obscurity and confu- 
 sion in this field have been due in no small measure 
 to the fact that there are as many methods of divid- 
 ing and arranging the subject as there are theologians. 
 Each one feels fully entitled to his own viewpoint, 
 instead of seeing that, as in any other science, there 
 is only one correct method. He insists that there is 
 a definite arrangement based upon general logical 
 principles, and puts into effect his three laws of 
 content ^ and his classification by 'dichotomy.' - In 
 accordance with this method, he divides the science 
 into 'doctrine' and 'discipline.' The subdivisions 
 of doctrine, in turn, concern 'faith' and 'works,' and 
 the classes of 'works' are 'obedience' and 'prayer' 
 on the one hand, and 'sacraments' on the other. 
 'Obedience' and 'prayer,' which he deals with in 
 books two and three respectively,^ relate more closely 
 to his ethics and are treated under that head,^ 
 while ' sacraments ' belongs with ' faith ' to his dog- 
 
 ^ See pp. no flF. ^ See pp. 130, 139, 150, and 164. 
 
 * See pp. 178 ff. * See p. 177. 
 
I go 
 
 PETEK RAMITS 
 
 matics, and is treated in the fourth book. His second 
 main division of ' discipline ' falls into the subjects of 
 'doctrinal practice' and 'church polity.' This part 
 of theology is not treated in his Commentaries , but 
 we have other ways of knowing the position of Ramus 
 in the matter.' Meanwhile, the general outline of 
 both the ' ethics ' and the ' theology ' proper included 
 in his Commentaries, is shown in the following 
 diagram. 
 
 Theology (in- f r concerning faith 
 
 eluding Christian doctrine concerning the works of faith ( obedience and prayer 
 
 Ethics), ' the art i !■ I sacraments 
 
 of living well/ [ (jj^j-ipUne / doctrinal practice 
 
 is divided into : I I church polity 
 
 The first book of the Commentaries consists in an 
 interpretation, somewhat scientific, but mostly popu- 
 lar, of the Apostles' Creed. It is partly a paraphrase 
 and partly an explanation of the articles, and is 
 largely in keeping with Catholic doctrine. The first 
 important theme is that of God's existence, character- 
 istics, and works.'- God is an eternal, immortal, and 
 beneficent spirit, and is incomprehensible to man save 
 through his works.'^ First the treatise deals with his 
 existence and nature, and then with creation, provi- 
 
 ' See pp. 99 fi. - See Chaps. 3-8. 
 
 ' This last is the reformed doctrine that was later known as via 
 
 causalitatis. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 191 
 
 dence, and predestination, but between the < hapters 
 on creation and providence is inserted one upon the 
 'fall of man.' The Ramian conception of God is 
 'trinitarian,' although it is not treated as a dogma 
 until toward the close of the book, when the doctrine 
 of the Holy Ghost is discussed.^ Upon creation and 
 providence Ramus presents nothing worthy of note ; 
 he simply makes a collection of biblical and classical 
 quotations without going closely into the kernel of 
 these questions. His explanation of the ' fall of man ' 
 and the consequences thereof is also superficial and 
 rather brief. Our first parents, he holds, were for- 
 getful of the wonderful benefits of the Creator and 
 wished to be his equal, and thus threw away the great 
 gifts they might otherwise have enjoyed forever. 
 In place of an immortal body they thus obtained 
 a mortal one subject to a thousand miseries, and, 
 through the contagion of the original sin, they ac- 
 quired a propensity to every sin, and polluted their 
 entire posterity. 
 
 Providence he treats more fully later on under 
 'predestination.'- In comparison with the dogma 
 of Calvin or even Zwingli, Ramus presents a very 
 mild conception of 'predestination.' He viewed the 
 
 » Le., I, 19, 72 flf. 2 1^ 6^ 24. Cf. also II, i, 27. 
 
192 PETER RAMUS 
 
 problem from an ethical standpoint, while they 
 regarded it purely in a logical light. Hence he can 
 speak of it as "that act of God, whereby out of his 
 free mercy he selects some for everlasting salvation 
 and out of his justice relegates others to eternal per- 
 dition." ' This position he supports by a number 
 of Old and New Testament quotations, which furnish 
 proof of both election and damnation, and more 
 especially by the approval of Augustine in his Letter 
 to Vincent and in his treatise On Predestination. 
 Nevertheless, while he rejects every evidence of uni- 
 versal salvation that appears in the Bible, he appar- 
 ently does so to be consistent with his Calvinistic 
 confession and does not show at all the conviction, 
 zeal, and almost grewsome satisfaction that Calvin 
 found in this resultant of his logic.- 
 
 The second article of the creed, which concerns 
 the person and work of Christ, Ramus interprets 
 mainly in conformity with Catholic doctrine, as de- 
 termined by the Councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon. 
 Now and then, however, characteristics of the 
 Protestant point of view gppear, and while he uses 
 the traditional formulations, he clothes them with 
 
 1 1, 8, 28. - See especially I, S, 32. 
 
 » See Chaps. 9-18. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 193 
 
 biblical, rather than scholastic, concepts and terms. 
 Another peculiarity of his treatment appears in the 
 way he deals with the twofold nature of Christ. His 
 humanity, he holds, is shown in his birth, sufferings, 
 death, and burial, while his deity is revealed in his 
 resurrection. In this way doctrines quite separate 
 in orthodox dogmatics are connected. He also adds 
 to the description in the creed an account of the 
 human life of Christ, from birth to the passion,^ 
 although he renders it largely nugatory by main- 
 taining that Christ reveals his real self only in his 
 divinity.^ 
 
 But the especial contribution of Ramus is his 
 treatment of the earthly mission of Christ, which, as 
 we have noted, is closely related to and throws light 
 upon, his person. His work is not brought under a 
 definite scheme, nor subsumed under such concepts 
 as 'reconciliation' or 'redemption,' but the author 
 merely relates the history of Christ's passion. He 
 comments upon the Jewish and Roman methods of 
 capital punishment, discusses the time of the cruci- 
 fixion, collects typical references from the Old Testa- 
 ment and pagan analogies from the classical writers, 
 and concludes with a most graphic description of the 
 
 a, II, 43 f- *I, II, 45- 
 
 o 
 
194 PETER RAMUS 
 
 inouriiiug of Nature over the death of the Savior.' 
 Similarly detailed descriptions are made of the resur- 
 rection. He gives a minute account of the descent 
 into hell,'- and the ascent into heaven.'' This final 
 abode of the righteous he depicts as a definite place,— 
 'the highest part of the universe,' "* and 'the seating 
 at the right hand of God ' '' is also locally conceived. 
 The 'final judgment' is likewise described. While 
 the whole narration is written in highly impassioned 
 and rhetorical language, it is only now and then that 
 dogmatism is displayed.*^ 
 
 Next Ramus presents the third article of the creed, 
 and interprets the doctrines of the Holy Spirit, the 
 church universal, the communion of saints, the for- 
 giveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and 
 the life everlasting.'^ He first cites typical passages 
 where the Godhead and the personality of the Holy 
 Ghost are described, and then names the specific 
 attributes and activities of the final member of the 
 Trinity. In his general attitude toward trinitari- 
 anism, he appeals to the traditions and usages of 
 
 »I, i2,46ff. 'I, 14, SS- n, 16,62 i. 
 
 ' I, 16, 63. ^ I, 17, 66. 
 
 'Occasional examples are found, as in I, 11, 46; I, 12, 50; and 
 
 I, 14, 57 f- 
 
 ^ Chaps. 19-25. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 95 
 
 the church and to the Athanasian Creed, and is 
 very strongly orthodox.^ He also retains unmodified 
 the doctrine of the church as the visible evidence 
 of the invisible kingdom of God, — 'perceived by 
 faith, although apparent to the eye of none.' - The 
 characteristics of the church or kingdom, however, 
 are developed according to the Apostles' Creed, and 
 are but little more than a paraphrase of the words ^ 
 used there. ' Holiness ' here below is only approxi- 
 mate and imperfect, though real, since it is mediated 
 through faith in Christ. Likewise, the Christian 
 Church is 'Catholic' or universal. Where the Old 
 Testament ' congregation of God ' referred to a defi- 
 nite land and a pecuhar people, Christianity aims to 
 include all peoples and times, for it is a common 
 bond in the Holy Ghost through the Gospel.'* 
 It is thus the means of a 'communion of saints' 
 or the redeemed. Further, since salvation is not self- 
 made, but is granted by the grace of God through 
 mediation upon the part of Christ, it comes about by 
 the ' forgiveness of sins. ' ^ 
 
 But his conception of the ' resurrection of the body' 
 
 »I, 19, 69ff. 2j 21, 79. 
 
 */.e., 'holy Catholic (or universal) Church,' 
 *I, 22, 77fif. -a, 23, 83. 
 
196 PETER RAiyrUS 
 
 Ramus takes from several of the old Church Fathers 
 rather than from the Scriptures themselves. He in- 
 terprets the risen body as not one of flesh, but of a 
 heavenly nature, and implies that the Bible is using 
 the language of symbolism. The 'life everlasting,' 
 which he deals with in the last chapter of the book,^ 
 is considered less as a specifically Christian hope of 
 the future than as a general belief in our immortal 
 nature. The eternity of punishment in hell is 
 emphasized, but no purgatory is mentioned. 
 
 The fourth book, discussing the 'sacraments,' is, 
 as we should expect, much more dogmatic even than 
 the first. It is more definite in its facts and more pre- 
 cise in expression, and more nearly approaches the 
 scholastic methods from which Ramus had broken. 
 It is more strictly theological than his semi-popular 
 treatment of the three articles of Christian faith. 
 He begins with a general definition of the sacraments 
 taken from the Old and New Testaments. He makes 
 the sacraments analogous to military oaths, and in- 
 clines more toward Zwingli than Luther in his posi- 
 tions on the subject. "A sacrament," he says, "is 
 an act of public faith instituted by God for commemo- 
 rating the death of Christ and participating in its 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 97 
 
 fruitage through an objective sign and solemn rite 
 of the Church." ' He especially emphasizes the 
 human side of the ceremony by further explaining : — 
 
 "On the part of God it is a sign of divine grace and 
 salvation ; on our part it is a sign of confession and 
 duty, by which we publicly swear allegiance to the 
 name and authority of God, and we profess a divine 
 state of mutual charity among ourselves, a church, 
 and a religion, so that by visible signs we make and 
 swear to invisible and spiritual treaties." - 
 
 The most complete illustrations of this general con- 
 ception of a sacrament are baptism and holy com- 
 munion.^ "Baptism is the sacrament by which, 
 when once cleansed by water in the name of the 
 Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we are initiated into a 
 profession of being cleansed of our sins by the blood 
 of Christ." * "The Lord's supper is the sacrament 
 by which through the gracious acts of God we use 
 the bread and wine for professing that we have been 
 raised up into eternal life through the crucified body 
 of Christ and his blood which was spilled for us." ^ 
 In this conception of the eucharist, which he defends 
 
 av, 1, 257. « IV, 3, 264 f. 
 
 > IV, 5-7. *IV, 5, 271. 
 
 6 IV, 8, 284. 
 
198 PETER RAMUS 
 
 at length, he diverges further from the orthodox views 
 of ' transubstantiation ' than did either Calvin or 
 Luther. He evidently comes closer to the Zwinglian 
 idea of a 'commemoration' than to the mysticism 
 of Calvin, which, on the one hand, teaches a conde- 
 scension of the divine powers of Christ into the com- 
 municant through the Holy Spirit, and, on the other, 
 affirms an elevation of the communicant to heaven. 
 Nor is Luther's ' real presence ' of Christ, in rejection 
 of which he makes seven counts,^ or any other form 
 of 'consubstantiation,' acceptable to Ramus. 
 
 Even a cursory examination of the organization of 
 his 'theology' reveals the same procedure, with its 
 merits and defects, that Ramus was found to employ 
 in his formulation of the studies in the trivium 
 and quadrivium. The presentation is clear, simple, 
 and logical, but at times it seems forced upon the 
 material and does not altogether grow out of the 
 nature of the discussion. Subjects somewhat cognate 
 are occasionally sundered by a too rigid pursuance of 
 the schema. The doctrine of ' justification by faith,' - 
 for example, is separated from 'remission of sins,' ^ 
 and is explained later, while 'free will' is quite irrele- 
 vantly discussed in connection with this latter topic. 
 1 See Chaps. 11-14. ^ II, i, 96. ' 1, 23, 83. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 1 99 
 
 Yet the work is most remarkable for its clarity and 
 its composition and style. It exhibits a wide range of 
 scholarship restrained by a strong and simple logic. 
 The argumentation on the sacraments is a marvel of 
 strength and simplicity, when we consider the theol- 
 ogy of the times. Also especially praiseworthy is the 
 combination of active piety and broad charity with 
 which the work rings. Most touching is that last 
 chapter/ in which he makes his eloquent appeal for 
 Christian unity, — an exhortation that had its 
 hearing years after the author's voice was hushed 
 by martyrdom. 
 
 The second part of the Ramian theology is not 
 given in his Commentaries, although the division is 
 recognized there. His general position on several 
 matters of doctrinal practice and church polity, 
 however, appear in his various controversies, and we 
 have reliable sources for judging of the attitude and 
 opinions of Ramus in these matters.- On the very 
 question of the eucharist mentioned above, he had a 
 
 'IV, 19. 
 
 2 There are extant three unpublished letters on these subjects 
 to his friend, the Protestant theologian, BuUinger, whom he had 
 consulted in shaping his views. See Lobstein, Ramus als Theologe, 
 pp. 63 f.. and Waddington, Ramus, sa vie, ses icrits, et ses opinions, 
 pp. 239-246. 
 
200 PETER RAMUS 
 
 public contest with Beza, who, of course, held to the 
 Calvinistic interpretation. The use of the words 
 'substance' and 'substantial' he recognized as an 
 effort to hold partially to tradition, and he charac- 
 terized both terms as 'foolish and misleading.' ^ 
 
 With regard to polity, it is obvious that Ramus 
 advocated a more democratic government of the 
 church than that practiced by the Calvinists. In 
 open opposition to Beza, he urged that the Calvin- 
 istic churches should grant more powers to the 
 membership, and he objected strenuously to the in- 
 creasing domination of the elders and the exclusion of 
 the deacons from the administration, whereby the 
 church was becoming decidedly oligarchic. These 
 enlarged rights and privileges for the elders had been 
 voted by the synod of the church held at La Rochelle 
 in April, 1571, under the moderatorship of Beza. 
 Propositions offered by Ramus as a protest against 
 this aristocratic innovation were adopted in March, 
 1572, at the provincial synod of Ile-de-France, but 
 were rejected at the national synod of Nimes two 
 months later. This assembly, like that at La Ro- 
 chelle, was dominated by the influence of Beza, and 
 
 ' Haec uiroque inanis ei falsa videatur. See Waddington, op. 
 cU., p. 434. 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 20I 
 
 decreed ^ that the "discipline of our church should 
 remain in the future, as it has always been observed 
 and practiced up to this day, without making the 
 least change or innovation, since it is founded upon 
 the word of God." And Beza in triumphant bigotry 
 declares : — 
 
 "That pseudo-dialectician, whom several scholars 
 of old surnamed 'the branch ^ of Mars,' stirred up a 
 very serious discussion concerning the whole gov- 
 ernment of the church, which, he claimed, ought 
 to be democratic, not aristocratic, leaving to the 
 council of elders only the proposal of legislation. 
 Wherefore, the synod at Nimes, in which I partici- 
 pated, upon my advice condemned that view, which 
 is most absurd and pernicious." ^ 
 
 We find that Beza returned to the subject later,* 
 and seemed to fear that Ramus would not submit 
 tamely, but would yet stir up dissension. But at 
 this time the reformer's enemies had accumulated 
 in sufficient numbers to prevent further disturbance 
 of the theological strata, Cathohc or Calvinist, and 
 
 1 See Aymon, Actes cedes last iques et civiles de tons les synodes 
 (La Haye, 1710), pp. 112 ff. 
 
 2 A pun on the name, Ramus. 
 
 * Theological Letters (Geneva, 1573), No. 67. 
 
 * See ibid., No. 68. 
 
202 PETER RAMUS 
 
 within a few months the courageous theologian was 
 no longer able to attempt any change in ecclesiastical 
 'discipline.' 
 
 Had Ramus Hved longer, there is reason to believe 
 that he would also have written upon the other pro- 
 fessional subjects of medicine and law. We have 
 already seen in his Advice on the Reformation of the 
 University ^ that he had decided views upon these 
 subjects, and that his emphasis upon civil law, which 
 had been entirely abandoned at Paris, and upon labo- 
 ratory and field work in medicine was decidedly mod- 
 ern. While Ramus himself never studied medicine, 
 and had read only a few works of Galen, ^ he recom- 
 mended a logical arrangement of this subject, which 
 he probably hoped to have similar to that he had 
 adopted for the liberal arts and theology. This would 
 undoubtedly have furnished a much clearer, more 
 intelligible, and more humane presentation than that 
 in vogue for medicine. Similarly, his knowledge of 
 law was confined to passages in legal authorities that 
 he had read to secure light upon the speeches of Cicero, 
 but he ardently wished to see the subject reorganized, 
 and had definite views as to the right method, which 
 
 1 See p. 83 f . 
 
 ^ See Schol. math., 1. II, and Nancel, Rami vita, p. 34, 
 
HIGHER AND PROFESSIONAL STUDIES 203 
 
 would probably have been similar to that used else- 
 where. Witness his appeal to the noted men in this 
 line at the time. "Among so many jurists," he asks 
 rhetorically, "is there to be no one who will under- 
 take to clear up and simplify this chaos?" ^ His 
 exhortation was afterward effective, and such logical 
 principles as his came to be generally utilized in the 
 organizing of law. 
 
 Hence within the purview of this remarkable re- 
 former fall all the theology and education of the 
 times. He wished to rid Christianity of all scholastic 
 and medieval agglomerations and bring it back to the 
 simple belief and informal organization of the primi- 
 ti^T days, and, in his efforts to accomplish this, did 
 not hesitate to oppose both Mother Church and her 
 Calvinistic daughter. His reconstruction of the mat- 
 ter and method of education is quite as worthy of 
 note, and eventually resulted in a new presentation of 
 all studies in the secondary and higher curricula. 
 
 .* Schol. math., 1. II, near the end. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 Value, Spread, and Ineluence of Ramism 
 
 Such were the contributions made by Ramus to 
 the progress of civiHzation and education. The im- 
 pulse out of which all these improvements developed 
 was his persistent struggle against the servile attach- 
 ment to Aristotle and scholasticism that had en- 
 thralled the sixteenth century. It was because the 
 implications of the medieval conception of the Aris- 
 totelian logic underlay all the life and studies of the 
 times that he found it necessary to oppose the Stagi- 
 rite so vehemently, and that, in turn, his breach 
 aroused so much passion and hostility. Hence the 
 most fundamental and far-reaching contribution of 
 Ramus was his aid to the emancipation of society 
 from the bondage to medieval authority, and to 
 the enfranchisement of truth and free investigation. 
 Through him were secured some latitude in the field 
 of knowledge and freedom from the ecclesiastical 
 domination of reason. 
 
 In turning his back upon the scholastic wisdom, 
 
 204 
 
VALUE. SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 20^ 
 
 Ramus substituted for it a return to antiquity. In 
 this he reveals his temperamental sympathy with 
 northern humanism, and, although his Protestant 
 inclinations did not materialize at first, the Reforma- 
 tion attitude was innate in him and seems implied 
 in his logic. He has all the merits and faults of hu- 
 manism, and seems to have been largely influenced 
 b}' the treatises of Agricola, Vives, Sturm, and 
 Melanchthon. However, while he was, like all 
 leaders of opinion, somewhat a product of the times, 
 more than any other of his day he cr3^stallized and 
 shaped the vague and inchoate sentiments that were 
 seeking expression. No other humanist was so ex- 
 treme in his opposition to medieval and scholastic 
 thought, or carried his principles into such radical 
 execution. While building somewhat upon his 
 predecessors and the advanced thought of the day, 
 the reforms suggested for the organization, content, 
 and method of education are found to have been quite 
 reconstructed, systematized, and given their greatest 
 advancement through him. 
 
 This humanistic attitude of Ramus prepares us to 
 find in him something of that overemphasis upon 
 Latin and neglect of the vernacular that afterward 
 plunged education into almost as fixed a mold 
 
206 PETER RAMUS 
 
 as scholasticism. He takes even his educational 
 principles and material mostly from the classical 
 writers, although he is decidedly eclectic in his use of 
 their thought. The basis of his reforms he borrows 
 from Quintilian and Aristotle. From the one he se- 
 cures his principle of making each art follow nature 
 and of following the presentation of the art by prac- 
 tice,^ and from the other his lav/s of truth, justice, and 
 wisdom in arranging the content of the liberal arts." 
 Likewise, he took most of his material in grammar 
 from the usage of classical writers, although he did not 
 recognize the absolute authority of Varro, Donatus, 
 and Priscian ; his rhetoric he borrowed largely from 
 Cicero and Quintilian ; in dialectic he used not only 
 Cicero, but even the despised Aristotle ; while Euclid 
 was his guide in mathematics ; and Pliny, Vergil, and 
 Aristotle furnished most of the 'physics' he held 
 should be taken from nature. 
 
 Yet Ramus is unwilling to follow any author slav- 
 ishly. He selects, in accordance with reason, the 
 material that seems to be natural. While the classi- 
 cal wTiters are the sources of his subject matter, he 
 deals with each one critically and refuses to acknowl- 
 edge authority. He estimates the value even of those 
 1 See pp. ii6 ff. * See pp. i lo ff. 
 
VALUE, SrRE.\D, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 207 
 
 from whom he selects according to his fixed principles 
 of subject matter. Whatever portion of a treatise 
 does not conform to these laws he either reorganizes 
 or entirely rejects. He eliminates from all the arts 
 the foreign and false, he closely distinguishes the 
 boundaries of each science, and he rearranges the 
 content so that no repetitions occur. Hence we have 
 seen that much which had the sanction of antiquity or 
 the indorsement of medieval traditions was dropped 
 from his reconstruction of the liberal arts and from his 
 ethical and biblical formulation of theology. The re- 
 sult was a great shortening of the course of study 
 and a remarkable improvement over the faults of the 
 scholastic texts and instruction, and even the short- 
 comings of the classical works. This economy of 
 time and effort, and increase in clearness, simplicity, 
 and interest may have tended a little to dilute the 
 material and separate related topics, and certainly 
 subjected Ramus to the criticism of both the Pari- 
 sian and German humanists on the ground of opening 
 the door to superficiality and a half-baked education. 
 But his reformation in the content of the curriculum 
 was, as a whole, decidedly in the interest of social 
 progress and improved pedagogy. 
 
 Of even more educational value was his develop- 
 
2o8 PETER RAMUS 
 
 meiit of method. He always advocates gradual prog- 
 ress from the easy to the difficult, and fuses theory 
 with practice in all studies. He does not heap up 
 rules for the sake of ' discipline ' and thus make them 
 an end in themselves, but recognizes that they are 
 but the means to the true end of use. This is se- 
 cured by practice in which there is a steady advance 
 in independence for the student. Moreover, while 
 the various liberal arts are taught in different years 
 of the course, in each one, by means of his ' combined 
 use,' practice is supposed to be afforded in all those 
 that have been previously presented. 
 
 In all this advance in material and procedure, 
 while no definite aim is formulated. Ramus seems to 
 have been guided by that underlying principle which 
 is, after all, in every age the real purpose of education. 
 His system implies an effort to produce 'social effi- 
 ciency.' The content of this ideal must, of course, 
 differ from age to age, as the society in which the pupil 
 lives develops and changes, and the school practice 
 is, from the force of inertia and habit, liable to be left 
 behind. The true reformer is he who strives, whether 
 consciously or not, to present a reconstruction of 
 theory that will meet the needs of the times, and to 
 insist upon its incorporation and realization in the 
 
VALUE, SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 209 
 
 existing educational institutions. Ramus fully meets 
 those tests. His reorganization of matter and refor- 
 mulation of method were intended to meet the de- 
 mands of the day for effective expression in writing 
 and speaking, and for leadership through oratory 
 and a mastery of Latin. If his methods of attaining 
 these ends, especially in such ' real ' studies as mathe- 
 matics and physics, now seem to us verbal and formal, 
 we must not be guilty of the historical fallacy through 
 neglecting to image the situation as it was then, nor 
 forget the constant emphasis that Ramus laid upon 
 'use,' even to the extent of being pilloried for utili- 
 tarianism. His struggles to make these reforms 
 effective and embody them in educational organiza- 
 tion are witnessed not only in his specific orations 
 upon this subject, but in practically every treatise or 
 work that he wrote. Together with his constant 
 effort to strike the shackles from the search for truth 
 and to point the way toward a broader ethics and re- 
 ligion, these strivings of a lifetime mark Ramus as a 
 great reformer, — intellectual, social, religious, and 
 educational. 
 
 The ideas of Ramus spread rapidly throughout 
 Europe. They were vigorously debated for a cen- 
 tury or more by partisans and adversaries in all the 
 
2IO PETER RAMUS 
 
 different countries, and made a tremendous impres- 
 sion upon philosophic and educational thought. 
 While eventually new doctrines replaced those of the 
 French reformer, the intellectual situation was per- 
 manently modified because of his teachings. Ramism 
 had perhaps less influence in France than in Germany, 
 but even there it found many ardent advocates. In 
 depicting his life, we have touched upon much of 
 the discussion and strife that were aroused over his 
 teachings in his native land.^ The animus of the 
 conservatives who defended Aristotle was evident 
 and does not need repetition. At various French 
 universities the Ramistic principles were soon pre- 
 sented by various professors and met with wide 
 adoption. At Paris the physicians, Fernel and De 
 Gorris, and a large number in the faculty of arts 
 supported the new doctrines; at Rheims, a former 
 colleague of Ramus, the Greek scholar, Alexandre, 
 continued the teachings he had acquired at Presles; 
 while Jean Bellon, a learned jurist, took up the cud- 
 gels at Toulouse. The principles spread and met 
 with a host of followers, who were ready to risk an 
 indictment for heresy and the wrath of the Holy 
 League.^ Even after the development of Cartesian- 
 
 ^ See pp. 31 ff. and 43 ff. ^ See p. 13. 
 
VALUE, SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 211 
 
 ism, we find the philosophy of Ramus frequently 
 discussed, and as late as 165 1 it was the occasion of a 
 serious controversy at Paris between a well-known 
 historian and a professor in the College of France on 
 the one hand and certain Jesuit scholars on the 
 other. ^ While, with the complete rejection of all 
 attempts at ecclesiastical reform and the domina- 
 tion of the Jesuits in the seventeenth century, the 
 educational reformation also vanished, Ramism 
 left a definite impression upon French thought. 
 In the suggestions of this sixteenth-century re- 
 former must to some extent be sought the spiritual 
 ancestry of Descartes, the Port Royalists, Gassendi, 
 and Voltaire. 
 
 In Spain and Portugal, Ramism was not well re- 
 ceived. Yet the celebrated grammarian, Sanchez, 
 taught the liberal arts according to the Ramian prin- 
 ciples, and left definite traces of the new system in 
 the University of Salamanca, the most flourishing in 
 Spain. The philosophy of Ramus was bitterly op- 
 posed, too, in all the universities of Italy, except 
 Bologna, and most of its partisans felt obliged to with- 
 draw from the country sooner or later. The most 
 distinguished of all these was Simoni, who defended 
 
 1 See Cossart, Orationes et carmina, pp. 73 and 104. 
 
212 PETER RAMUS 
 
 Ramism against the attacks of Carpentarius and 
 Schegk. But we might perhaps consider as continu- 
 ing the spirit of Ramism a number of later Italian 
 writers, including the unfortunate Bruno, who dis- 
 tinguished themselves by their attack upon Aristotle's 
 philosophy. The Ramistic philosophy appeared also 
 in Denmark, thanks to Krag, who taught it zealously 
 and defended it in his writings. In the Low Countries 
 it was early brought to Douai by Nancel, the loyal 
 pupil of Ramus, and throughout these lands it found 
 an untiring interpreter in Snellius. Nor could the 
 new philosophy be kept out of the universities of 
 Holland, and the authorities at Leyden were forced 
 to admit it upon equal terms with the Aristotelian. 
 In England it made little progress at Oxford, which 
 was devoted to Aristotle, but Cambridge proved more 
 hospitable. At the latter place, through the influence 
 of Ascham and Sidney, who were friendly to Ramism, 
 it was largely adopted. When it was attacked by the 
 scholastic and mystic, Everard Digby, it was warmly 
 defended by William Temple, Sr., who also helped to 
 give it vogue. The discussion that arose may have 
 been the means of starting the opposition of Bacon to 
 all deductive systems, especially as Digby was prob- 
 ably his tutor. However that may be, Ramism 
 
VALUE, SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 213 
 
 survived and flourished. As late as 1672, the Uni- 
 versity of Cambridge published the logic of Ramus 
 with a commentary by Amesius, and the same year 
 a more distinguished honor was done the system 
 through the appearance of a Latin treatise by the poet 
 Milton upon A More Complete Organization of the Art 
 of Logic Arranged according to the System of Ramus. ^ 
 An even better footing was afforded Ramism in Scot- 
 land, since the regent of the country, James Stuart, 
 Count of Murray, had been a pupil of Ramus. 
 Through George Buchanan, another friend, it is 
 probable that the Ramistic philosophy was estab- 
 lished at the University of St. Andrews. 
 
 It was in Germany and Switzerland, however, that 
 the principles of Ramus received the greatest atten- 
 tion and exerted the widest influence. Despite the 
 opposition of Beza, the new philosophy attracted a 
 number of Genevan scholars, among whom was the 
 martyr Arminius. Basel, Zurich, Bern, Lausanne, 
 and other cities of Switzerland received the new dia- 
 lectic with even more favor, and Ramism was openly 
 professed by men like Zwinger, Freigius, and Aretius. 
 It was not a passing infatuation, either, for it is 
 
 1 Joannis Miltoni Artis Logicce Plenior Institutio ad Petri Rami 
 Methodum Concinnata. (London, 1672.) 
 
214 PETER RAMUS 
 
 kjiown that well into the eighteenth century it still 
 existed in Switzerland. 
 
 In Alsace the influence of Sturm accomplished a 
 general spread of the Ramian doctrines, and at Strass- 
 burg and Savern the German humanist was ably aided 
 by several scholars. Freigius, who taught both at 
 Freiburg and Altorf, as well as at Basel, Fabricius, 
 rector of the University of Dlisseldorf , and Chytraeus, 
 rector at Rostock, also greatly aided in the dissemi- 
 nation. A swarm of disciples openly avowed their 
 convictions throughout Germany. The chair of 
 philosophy at nearly all the other Protestant univer- 
 sities, such as Gottingen, Helmstadt, Erfurt, Leipzig, 
 Marburg, and Hannover, came to be occupied for a 
 time by a Ramist. Leading philosophers, jurists, and 
 theologians joined the cause. The Lutherans, how- 
 ever, suspecting that the Ramian principles were 
 in some way an outgrowth of Calvinism, made a 
 propaganda of the dialectic of Melanchthon ^ in 
 opposition, and prominent adversaries of Ramism 
 arose at Tubingen, Altorf, Heidelberg, Wittenberg, 
 
 1 The Melanchthonian logic, which was iii general use at German 
 universities, was based on that of Aristotle, although somewhat 
 improved and rhetorically written. While Melanchthon admitted 
 that certain of Aristotle's writings had been lost, he would not 
 concede that merely fragments were left, as Ramus claimed. 
 
VALUE, SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 21 5 
 
 and other universities, and the contest waxed fast 
 and furious. 
 
 The controversy at the University of Leipzig be- 
 tween 1576 and 1592, of which we possess a detailed 
 account,^ is probably a fair type of what was gener- 
 ally occurring at most of the institutions. Johannes 
 Cramer, a master of standing at Leipzig, several times 
 dean of the philosophical faculty and twice even 
 rector of the university, was an ardent Ramist and 
 challenged the professor of dialectic, who was ortho- 
 dox in his philosophy, to a public debate. When, 
 however, the theses of Cramer were sent to the dean, 
 he condemned them as Ramistic, and declared the 
 debate out of order. Cramer continued, however, 
 both in public and private, to present Ramism to 
 the youth of the university, and for a series of years 
 was in a wrangle with one or another of his colleagues. 
 An interdict against his lectures on the subject was 
 issued by the faculty of philosophy and the rector 
 without much effect, and, after examination of the 
 notes of his students and the discovery of much hereti- 
 cal logic, he was suspended from his chair. This led 
 to a riot on the part of the students, and while it was 
 
 ^ Voigt, Ramismus an der Universital Leipzig, in Leips. S&chs. 
 gesell. der wiss. Berichte phil., 1881. 
 
2l4 PETER RAMUS 
 
 suppressed by the rector, the faculty was forced by 
 public sentiment to reinstate Cramer, after a public 
 statement that he had never intended to calumni- 
 ate Aristotle or Melanchthon. However, he clearly 
 continued to teach the Ramian doctrines, and the 
 effects of this instruction were only too obvious when 
 students were examined for their degree. In three 
 cases they were allowed to graduate only upon prom- 
 ising the faculty never to teach Ramism. More 
 trouble was soon precipitated and Cramer was once 
 more unseated, but this time the case was appealed 
 to the elector. As this sovereign was getting along 
 in years, he referred the matter to his progressive 
 son, who, much to the chagrin of the conservative 
 faculty, expressed his surprise that university 
 instruction in philosophy should be limited to tra- 
 ditional doctrines, and declared that only by free 
 expression could any progress be made. He repri- 
 manded the faculty for their attempt to dispossess a 
 professor appointed by the sovereign, and demanded 
 that Cramer be restored. After his rehabilitation 
 half a dozen outbreaks against Cramer occurred, and 
 both he and his supporters were as far as possible de- 
 prived of official recognition and constantly hounded 
 by the faculty. Finally, in 1592, Cramer, worn out 
 
VALUE, SPREAD, AND INFLUENCE OF RAMISM 21 7 
 
 with the controversy, resigned voluntarily and be- 
 came the municipal physician for his native town. 
 The faculty then were careful to see that his successor 
 was not a Ramist. 
 
 Similar contests over Ramism must have been go- 
 ing on at the other universities. These seats of con- 
 servatism were not quickly or easily aroused from 
 their routine, as we have seen in the case of Ramus 
 himself at Strassburg and Heidelberg.^ Early in 
 the seventeenth century Ramism was generally pro- 
 scribed at the universities of Saxony, the Palatinate, 
 and Bavaria, and the Ramists sought to compromise 
 by combining their dialectic with that of Melanch- 
 thon. A new school arose out of this union, — the 
 so-called 'Philippo-Ramists,' which included such 
 philosophers as Frisius, Buscher, Casmann, Kecker- 
 mann, and x\lstedt, the teacher and friend of Co- 
 menius. But, like most compromises, this syn- 
 cretism was unsatisfactory and led rather to the 
 preservation of Aristotle than of Ramus. 
 
 Yet the influence of Ramism cannot be regarded 
 as entirely lost to philosophy or human intelligence, 
 either in Germany or elsewhere. The authority of 
 Aristotle was rudely shaken, and the way to free 
 
 ' See pp. 96 f. 2 cf the Philippo-Ramian Grammar on p. 132. 
 
2l8 PETER RAMUS 
 
 thought was opened. Early in the next century 
 came the work of Bacon, Descartes, and Comenius, 
 and from them has grown that apostolic succession 
 of modern thought, — Locke, Berkeley, Leibniz, 
 Hume, Kant, and Hegel in the realm of speculation, 
 and, in the reformation of education, Rousseau, 
 Pestalozzi, Herbart, and Froebel. While Ramus and 
 his philosophy cannot be interpreted as belonging to 
 this awakened group, it was to some extent through 
 his efforts that the transition was made from scho- 
 lasticism to modern philosophy and education. He 
 at least freed the human spirit from the dungeon of 
 Aristotle, and drew it forth from the medieval twi- 
 light. He improved all the literary and expression 
 studies, and helped give mathematics and science a 
 start. It seems fitting, therefore, to account Peter 
 Ramus a leader in sixteenth-century reforms and in 
 the progress toward modern civilization and enlight- 
 enment. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 I. Primary Sources 
 
 Banosius, T. Rami vita in Commentaria de religione Chris- 
 tiana (Frankfurt, 1576). 
 
 Carpentarius, J. Contra importunas Rami actioties (Paris, 
 1566). 
 
 Felibien, M. Histoire de la mile de Paris. 
 
 Freigius, J. T. Commentaires de Ramus sur les discours de 
 Ciceron (Bale, 1574). Preface on the Life of Ramus. 
 
 Milton, J. Artis logical plenior institutio (London, 1672). 
 
 Nancel, N. de. Petri Rami Veromandui, eloquentia el 
 philosophice apud Parisios professoris regit vita (Paris, 
 
 1599)- 
 Ramus, P. Dialecticce partitiones (sive I nstitutiones) , 1543 ; 
 
 Aristotelicce animadversiones, 1543; Tres Orationes a 
 tribus liberalium disciplinarum professoribus, 1544; 
 Eudides, 1 544 ; Oratio habita LiiteticB in gymnasia 
 Prmlleorum, 1545; S omnium Scipionis ex libro 6 Cice- 
 ronis de Reptiblica, 1546; Oratio de studiis philosophi(B 
 et eloquenticB conjungendis, 1546; Brutin<B qiiCBstiones 
 in Oratorem Ciceronis, 1547; Rhetorics distinctiones , 
 1549; Platonis epistolce latina facta, 1549; M. T. 
 Ciceronis de fata liber, 1550; M. T. Ciceronis epistola 
 nona ad P. Lentulum, 1550; Pro philosophica Parisi&n- 
 sis Academics disciplina Oratio, 1551; Oratio initio 
 219 
 
220 PETER Ri^MUS 
 
 sucB projessionis iiabita, 1551 ; M. T. Ciceronis pro Caio 
 Rabirio perduellionis reo or alio, 1551 ; Prcdectiones in 
 lihrum I Ciceronis de legibus, 1554; M. Tullii Ciceronis 
 de lege agraria contra P. Servilium Rullum tribunum plebis 
 orationes tres, 1552; M. Tullii Ciceronis in L. Catilinam 
 Orationes IIII, 1553; Arithmelicce libri tres, 1555; 
 Dialectique, 1555; P. Virgilii Maronis Bucolica, 1555; 
 P. Virgilii Maronis Georgica, 1556; Dialecticce libri duo, 
 1556; Audomari Talcei Admonitio ad Adrianum Turne- 
 bum, 1556; M. T. Ciceronis de optimo genere oratorum 
 prcefatio in contrarias JSschinis et Demosthenis orationes, 
 1557 ; Ciceronianus, 1557 ; Marci Tulii Ciceronis fami- 
 liarium epistolarum libri XVI . 1557 ; Or alio de legatione, 
 1557; Liber de moribus veterum Gallorum, 1558; Libri 
 de Ccesaris militia, 1559; Grammaiiccelihrlquattuor, 1559; 
 Rudimenta grammalicce {latince), 1559; Scholce gram- 
 maticcB, 1559; Grammatica grceca, 1560; Rudimenta 
 grammatics grcecoR, 1560; Gramere, 1562; Prooemium 
 reformandcB Parisiensis academi<2, and Advertissements 
 sur la reformation de I'universite de Paris, 1562; Or alio 
 de professione liberal ium artiiim, 1563; Scholar um physi- 
 carum libri octo, 1565; Scholar nm meiaphyslcarum libri 
 quattuordecim, 1566; Actiones duce hahitcB in senatu pro 
 regia mathematical profession! s cathedra, 1 566 ; Preface 
 sur le Proeme des mathematiques, 1566; Procemium 
 mathematicum, 1567 ; La Remonstrance Jaite au conseil 
 ^me, 1567; Audomari Talcei Rhetor ica, P. Rami prcelec- 
 tionibus illustrata, 1567; Rector i et Academicp. Pari- 
 siensi, 1568; GeomrtricB libri septem et viginti, 1569; 
 Scholce in liberates arles, 1 569 ; Scholarum mathemati- 
 carum libri iinus et triginta, 1569; P. Rami et Jacobi 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 221 
 
 Schecii Epistolee, 1569; Defensio pro Aristotele adversns 
 Jac. Schecium, 1571 ; Basilea ad senatum populumque 
 Basiliensem, 1571; Testamentum, 1574; PrcBlectiones 
 in Ciceronis orationes octo consular es, 1574; Commenta- 
 riorum de religione Christiana likrl quattuor, 1576; Pro- 
 fessio regia, 1576; Collectanea prcefationes, epistolm, 
 orationes, 1577; M. T. Ciceronis pro M. CI. Mar cello 
 oratio, 1582; In Ciceronis orationes et scripta nonnulla, 
 1582; Arithmeticce libri duo et Algebra todidem, 1586; 
 Arisiotelis Politica, 1601 ; Epistolce varicB. 
 
 II. Secondary Sources 
 
 Baillet, a. Jugements des Savans sur les principaux 
 
 ouvrages des auleurs, Amsterdam, 1725. V, 125 f. ; VIII, 
 
 204 f. 
 Barni, J. R. Les Martyres de la libre pensee. Pp. 107-135. 
 Bayle, p. Dictionnaire historique et critique, Rotterdam, 
 
 1697. Ramus. 
 Caraman, le dug de. Histoire des revolutions de la philoso- 
 
 phie en France. Ill, pp. 245 fif. 
 Crevier, J. B. Histoire de VUniversite de Paris, Paris, 1761. 
 
 V and VI. 
 Denifle, H., et Chatelain, JE. Chartularium universitatis 
 
 Parisiensis, Paris, 1 889-1 897. 
 Desmaze, C. a. Petrus Ramus, professeur au College de 
 
 France, sa vie, ses ecrits, sa mort, Paris, 1864. 
 Du Boulay, N. Histoire de VUniversite de Paris. 
 Gaillard, G. N. Histoire de Franqois I, Paris, 1766. VII 
 
 and VIII. 
 Guggenheim, M. Beitrdge zur Biographic des Petrus Ramus 
 
222 PETER RAMUS 
 
 (Zeifschrift fiir Philosophic und Philosophische Kritik, 
 
 Band 120, Heft 2, ss. 140-153), Leipzig, 1903. 
 JouRDAiN, C. Histoire de VUniversite de Paris au XV 11^ el 
 
 au XV 1 11^ siecle, Paris, 1862-1866. 
 Lantoine, H. Histoire de renseignement secondaire en 
 
 France au XV IP siecle, Paris, 1874. 
 LoBSTEiN, P. Petrus Ramus als Theologe, Strassburg, 1878. 
 Owen, J. The Skeptics of the French Renaissance, London, 
 
 1893. Chap. 11. 
 Prantl, K. von. Ueber P. Ramus {Miinchener Sitzungs- 
 
 berichte, 1878). 
 Saisset, E. E. Les precurseurs de Descartes, Paris, 1862. 
 Schweitzer, A. Die Philosophie des Petrus Ramus (Erster 
 
 Artikel, 10, of Die Entwickelung des Moralsystems in der 
 
 Rejormirten Kirche), Leipzig, 1850. 
 VoiGT, G, Ueber den Ramismus an der Universitdt Leipzig 
 
 (Berichte iiber die V erhandlungen der Gesellschaft der 
 
 Wissenschaften, Band 99), Leipzig, 1887. 
 Waddington, C. De Petri Rami vita, scriptis, philosophia, 
 
 Paris, 1848. 
 Waddington, C. Ramus, sa vie, ses ecrits, et ses opinions, 
 
 Paris, 1855. 
 WiJRKERT, G. Die encyclopddie des Petrus Ramus, Ein 
 
 Reform/oersuch der Gelehrtenschule des 16. Jahrhunderts, 
 
 Leipzig, 1898. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abelard, i6. 
 
 Academic, 52. 
 
 Academy, Talon, 42. 
 
 Adidce on the Reformation of the Uni- 
 versity of Paris, 78-84, 202. 
 
 Agricola, 2, 17, 98, 142, 205. 
 
 Aim of Ramus, 108. 
 
 Albigenses, 7. 
 
 Alexander of Villedieu, 16, 38, 121. 
 
 Alexandre, Barthelemy, 28, 210. 
 
 Alstedt, 217. 
 
 Altorf, 214. 
 
 Amboise, Peace of, 86. 
 
 Amesius, 21 j. 
 
 'Analysis,' 117, 140, 165. 
 
 Attimadversions on Aristotle, 30, 34, 
 39, 59. 143- 
 
 Apollonius, 60. 
 
 Archimedes, 43, 60, 61. 
 
 Aretius, 213. 
 
 Aristotelianism, 98. 
 
 Aristotle, 16, 17, 22, 25, 26, 27, 30, 64, 
 72, 144, 169, 175, 176, 206, 217. 
 
 Arminius, 213. 
 
 Ascham, 4, 61, 73, 212. 
 
 Augsburg, 98. 
 
 Bacon, 212, 218. 
 
 Banosius, 19. 
 
 Basel, 10, 94, 96, 213, 214. 
 
 Bavaria, 217. 
 
 Bellon, 210. 
 
 Berkeley, 218. 
 
 Bern, 213. 
 
 Beza, 10, 74, 99, 103, 200, 201, 213. 
 
 Bourbon, Charles of, 31, 104. 
 
 Bourbons, 11, 12. 
 
 Brah6, 99. 
 
 Bruno, 212. 
 
 Buchanan, George, 213. 
 
 Budseus, 4. 
 
 Bullinger, 95. 
 Buscher, 217. 
 
 Calvin, 7, 10, 72, 95, 191, 198. 
 
 Calvinism 11, 214. 
 
 Cambridge, 4, 212, 213. 
 
 Camerarius, 61. 
 
 Carpentarius, 41, 45, 46, 63 f., 70, 88 fif., 
 
 104, io6, 212. 
 Casmann, 217. 
 Catherine de' Medici, 11. 
 Catherine Petit, 95. 
 Catholics in France, 10 fif. 
 Cayet, ig. 
 Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine, see 
 
 Lorraine. 
 Charles V, 8, 10. 
 Charles IX, 11. 
 Charpwntier, see Carpentarius. 
 Cheke, 4. 
 Chytraeus, 214. 
 Cicero, 17, 42, 43, I34, I35. IS7, 
 
 206. 
 Coccius, 95. 
 CoJet, 5, 6. 
 
 Coligny, Admiral, 12, 13. 
 College of Ave Maria, 28, 29, 59. 
 College of Beauvais, 33. 
 College of Boncour, 32, 45. 
 College of Clermont, 87. 
 College of France, 4, 13, 15, 40, 45, 
 
 100, 104, 162. 
 College of Mans, 27. 
 College of Na\'arre, 16, 20, 27, 108. 
 College of Presles, 13, 14, 39, 45, 47, 
 
 85, 100, 104. 
 College Royal, see College of France. 
 CoUoquy of Poissy, 10, 73, 100. 
 Comenius, 217, 218. 
 Commentaries on the Christian Religion, 
 
 97, 184 ff. 
 
 223 
 
224 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Committee of Seven, 69, 78. 
 
 Conde, Prince of, 12, 13, 70. 
 
 Consonants, Ramist, 125. 
 
 Cosel, Dampestre, 88. 
 
 Cramer, 215 f. 
 
 Curriculum in University of Paris, 
 
 14 f. 
 Cust, 19. 
 
 De Disciplinis, 2g. 
 
 De Gorris, 210. 
 
 De I'Hospital, 76. 
 
 De Montuelle, 33. 
 
 Demosthenes, 157. 
 
 Descartes, 162, 211, 218. 
 
 Despantere, 121. 
 
 Dialectic, 17, 21, 29, 58, 141-159. 
 
 ' Dichotomy,' 130, 164. 
 
 Digby, Everard, 212. 
 
 Diplomatic missions of Ramus, 67 ff. 
 
 Disputation, 21 f., 29, 114. 
 
 Doctrinale, 121. 
 
 Dolet, Etienne, 18. 
 
 Donatus, 6, 121, 123, 206. 
 
 D'Ossat, 87. 
 
 Douai, 212. 
 
 Dream of Scipio, 40. 
 
 Du Bellay, 44. 
 
 Dubois, 18. 
 
 Du Chastel, 33, 43. 
 
 Edict of Francis against Ramus, 36. 
 
 Edict of Nantes, 13. 
 
 Edict of Toleration, 12, 76. 
 
 Edward VI, 9. 
 
 Elegancies of Latin, 121. 
 
 Elizabeth, 9. 
 
 Erasmus, 2, 4, 6, 7, 16, 115. 
 
 Erfurt, 4, 214. 
 
 ' Esoteric,' 120. 
 
 Ethics, 73. 
 
 Ethics of Ramus, 173-184. 
 
 Euclid, 38, 43, 59, 161, 165. 
 
 ' Exoteric,' 120. 
 
 ' Explanation,' 116, 117, 118, 140. 
 
 Fabricius, 214. 
 Ferdinand of Hapsburg, 9. 
 Fernel, 210. 
 Fin^e, 18, 59. 
 
 Forcadel, 61. 
 
 Francis I, 4, lo, 31, 34. 
 
 Francis II, 11. 
 
 Francis, Duke of Guise, see Guise. 
 
 Frankfurt, 99. 
 
 Frederick III, 97. 
 
 Freiburg, 94, 214. 
 
 Freigius, 19, 94, 213, 214. 
 
 ' French Plato,' 92. 
 
 Frisius, 217. 
 
 Froebel, 218. 
 
 Galen, 17, 24, 43. 
 
 Galland, 32, 33, 41, 44, 45, 63, 70. 
 
 Gassendi, 211. 
 
 'Genesis,' 117, 140, 165. 
 
 Geneva, 10, 99, 103. 
 
 Gottingen, 214. 
 
 Gov^a, 32, 33- 
 
 Grammar, 57, 1 21-134. 
 
 Grocyn, 4. 
 
 Grynaeus, Samuel, 95. 
 
 Guise, Duke of, 11, 77. 
 
 Guises, 12, 13, 69, 71, 78, 88, 90. 
 
 Gymnasien, 3. 
 
 Hannover, 214 
 
 Hegel, 218. 
 
 Heidelberg, 4, 93, 96, 98, 214, 217. 
 
 Heliogabalus, 117. 
 
 Helmstadt, 214. 
 
 Hennuyer, 27, 32. 
 
 Henry II, 11, 41, 42, 49, 50. 
 
 Henry III, 11. 
 
 Henry IV, 13. 
 
 Henry VIII, 7, 9. 
 
 Herbart, 218. 
 
 Hervagius, 94. 
 
 Hieronymians, 2. 
 
 Hippocrates, 24, 43. 
 
 Holy League, 13. 
 
 Huguenots, 11, 105; of state, 12, 85; 
 
 of religion, 12, 13. 
 Humanism, i ff., 15, 98. 
 Hume, 218. 
 Huss, 7. 
 
 Inaugural address, 48 ff. 
 Institutes of Christianity, 10. 
 Institutions of Dialectic, 30, 35, 58. 
 
INDEX 
 
 225 
 
 Jena, 4. 
 
 Jesuit colleges, 3, 87. 
 
 Jesuits, 211. 
 
 Kant, 218. 
 Keckermann, 217. 
 Konigsberg, 4. 
 Krag, 212. 
 
 La Rochelle, 12, 200. 
 
 Latin grammar school, 5. 
 
 Lausanne, gg, 213. 
 
 Law, 70, 82, 202. 
 
 Laws of 'truth,' 'justice,' and 'wis- 
 dom,' II f., 135, 163, 206. 
 
 Lefevre, 6, 7, 18. 
 
 Leibniz, 218. 
 
 Leipzig, 4, 214, 215. 
 
 Le Masson, 18. 
 
 Lesage, 39, 4i- 
 
 Leyden, 212. 
 
 Linacre, 4. 
 
 Locke, 218. 
 
 Lorraine, Charles, Cardinal of, 11, 15, 
 31, 41, 46, 49, 51, 74, 78, 100, 105. 
 
 Loyola, 3. 
 
 Luther, 6, 7, 72, 196, 198. 
 
 Lutherans, 214. 
 
 ' Maecenas,' 53 ff., 88. 
 
 Marburg, 214. 
 
 Margaret of Navarre, 10. 
 
 Masters of university colleges, 16. 
 
 Mathematics, 59, 88 f., 160-165. 
 
 Medicine, 80, 82, 202. 
 
 Meigret, 18. 
 
 Melanchthon, 6, 113, I3i> i34i i39, 
 
 205, 214, 217. 
 Metaphysics, 87. 
 Methods, 21 ff., 56 f. 
 Milton, 213. 
 Montauban, 12. 
 Montluc, Jean de, 105. 
 More, 4. 
 
 'Nature,' 109 f. 
 Nicholas of Nancel, 19, 212. 
 Nimes, 12, 200. 
 Niiremberg, 98. 
 
 (Ecolarapadius, 95. 
 Organon, 23, 142. 
 Oxford, 4, 212. 
 
 Palatinate, 92, 96, 217. 
 
 Pappus, 60. 
 
 Parlement of Paris, 13, 33- 
 
 Perion, 32, 43, 63- 
 
 Peripatetics, 31, 37. 
 
 Pestalozzi, 218. 
 
 Petromachy, 44- 
 
 Philip II, 9- 
 
 PhiUppo-Ramian Grammar, 132. 
 
 Philippo-Ramists, 217. 
 
 Physics, 62, 168-172. 
 
 Plato, 16, 17, 24, 27, 42. 
 
 Platter, 94. 
 
 Pliny, 169. 
 
 Poles, the, 105. 
 
 Port RoyaUsts, 211. 
 
 'Practice,' 109, 114-118, 140. 
 
 Principles of Ramus, 109-119, 206. 
 
 Principles of ' system,' 110-113. 
 
 Priscian, 16, 121, 123, 206. 
 
 Proclus, 61. 
 
 Pronunciation, 62 f., 125. 
 
 Protestants, 10 ff., 72. 95. 
 
 Quadrivium, S9, 120, 160-172. 
 Quintilian, 18, 42, 43, 44, ^34, I3S, 
 139, 206. 
 
 Rabelais, 44. 
 Reformation, 6, 8, 188. 
 Renaissance, i, 2, 5, 8, 188. 
 Republic, 39. 
 Reuchlin, 2. 
 Rheims, 210. 
 Rheticus, 61. 
 Rhetoric, 58, 134-141. 
 Rostock, 214. 
 Rousseau, 218. 
 Royal lecturers, 16. 
 Rue de Fouarre, 14. 
 
 St. Bartholomew's Day, massacre of, 
 
 13, los- 
 St. Denis, 90, 102. 
 St. Germain, 67. 
 St. Paul's School, 5. 
 
2 26 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Sanchez, 211. 
 
 Sapiens, 29. 
 
 Savern, 214. 
 
 Saxony, 217. 
 
 Schegk, 96, 212. 
 
 Schreckfuchs, 94. 
 
 Serenus, 60. 
 
 Sidney, 212. 
 
 Simler, 95. 
 
 Sinioni, 211. 
 
 Snellius, 212. 
 
 Social efficiency, 208. 
 
 Socrates, 17, 24, 38. 
 
 Sorbon, Robert, 14. 
 
 Sorbonne, 14, 62, 125. 
 
 Stoics, 17. 
 
 Strassburg, 3, 93, 98, 214, 217. 
 
 Stuart, James, 213. 
 
 Studies in Dialectic, 21, 144. 
 
 Studies in Physics, 168. 
 
 Studies in the Liberal Arts, 17, 96. 
 
 Sturm, 3. 6, 17, 29, 73. 93. ii3, uSi 
 
 118, 161, 20s, 214. 
 Sulzer, 95. 
 Syntax, 124, 128 f. 
 'System,' 109, 110-114. 
 
 Talon, 28, 38, 39. 40- 
 Temple, William, 212. 
 Theodosius, 60. 
 Theology, 98, 184-202. 
 Toulouse, 210. 
 Tousan, 65. 
 
 Tremellius, g6. 
 Trivium, 57, S9. iao-i:,9. 
 Tubingen, 4, 96, 214. 
 Tumebus, 65 f., 70. 
 
 University of Bologna, 93, 211. 
 University of Diisseldorf, 214. 
 University of Leipzig, 215-217. 
 University of Paris, 3, 10, 13, 14, 2i 
 
 36. 
 University of St. Andrews, 213. 
 University of Salamanca, 211. 
 ' Usuarius,' 57. 
 
 Valla, 17, 142. 
 
 Valence, Bishop of, 105. 
 
 Varro, 206. 
 
 Vassy, massacre at, 12, 85. 
 
 Vergil, 121, 169. 
 
 Vives, 17, 113. "5, "8, 142, 205. 
 
 Voltaire, 211. 
 
 Waldenscs, 7, 10. 
 Westphalia, 92. 
 Wittenberg, 4, 214. 
 Wolf, 94- 
 Wolsey, 4. 
 Wyclif, 7- 
 
 Zurich, 213. 
 Zwinger, 94, 98, 213. 
 Zwingli, 7. 72, i9i> 196, 198. 
 
VITA 
 
 Frank Pierrepont Graves was bom in Brooklyn, New 
 York, July 23, 1869. He received the degree of Bachelor of 
 Arts from Columbia University in 1890, of Master of Arts 
 from the same institution in 1891, of Doctor of Philosophy 
 from Boston University in 1892, of Doctor of Letters 
 (honorary) from Heidelberg University (Ohio) in 1897, and 
 Doctor of Laws from Hanover College in 1897. He served 
 from 189 1 to 1896 as Assistant Professor and Professor of 
 Greek in Tufts College, from 1896 to 1903 as President of 
 the University of Wyoming and President of the University 
 of Washington, from 1904 to 1907 as Professor of the History 
 of Education in the University of Missouri, and since 1907 
 as Professor of the History of Education in the Ohio State 
 University. He has written three books on Greek subjects 
 and five on the History of Education, and has contributed a 
 large number of articles to educational journals. He was 
 married Dec. 18, 1895, to Helen Hope Wadsworth at Maiden, 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 227 
 
^r^HE following pages contain advertisements of 
 books by the same author or on kindred subje6ls. 
 
History of Education during the Middle Ages 
 and the Transition to Modern Times 
 
 By frank PIERREPONT GRAVES, Ph.D. 
 Professor of the History of Education in the Ohio State University 
 
 Cloth, i2mo, $1.10 net 
 
 This volume is a continuation of the " History of Education 
 before the Middle Ages." Without dwelling upon matters re- 
 motely related to the educational problems of to-day, an accurate 
 picture is afforded of educational history between the sixth and 
 the eighteenth centuries. The sources are extensively quoted, 
 and selected lists of supplementary reading are given at the end 
 of each chapter. The book is suitable as a text or a work of ref- 
 erence. 
 
 " In the same spirit of careful research and open-minded discussion 
 that marked the first part of his work." — The Independent. 
 
 " The present volume is not only as good as, but better than, the pre- 
 vious one. The work is conspicuous among histories of education as 
 one of the most complete and interesting." 
 
 — Journal of Educational Psychology. 
 
 " He has made of dry historical facts a narrative full of interest, one 
 that touches the life, politics, religion, and philosophy of the times." 
 
 — Pedagogical Seminary. 
 
 A History of Education during Modern Times 
 
 By FRANK PIERREPONT GRAVES, Ph.D. 
 
 Professor of the History of Education in the Ohio State University 
 
 In preparation 
 In continuation of the two preceding volumes, this work will 
 •over the history of education from the days of Rousseau and the 
 ''rench Revolution to the present time. 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York 
 
A History of Education before 
 the Middle Ages 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK PIERREPONT GRAVES, Ph.D. 
 
 Professor of the History of Education in the Ohio State University 
 
 Cloth, i2mo, $1.10 net 
 
 This book gives a comprehensive account of the history of education 
 before the day of the monastic schools. It presents sufficient material 
 to mark the most significant movements and discloses the underlying 
 principles without entering into unnecessary detail. All interpretations 
 are based upon historical data collected from the sources, and direct 
 quotation is liberally used throughout. 
 
 " Professor Graves has taken the method of procedure, at once most natural 
 and most philosophical, of studying each stage with a view to progress." 
 
 — TAe Outlook. 
 
 " A book which gives evidence on every page of ripe scholarship, breadth 
 of view, and keen discrimination between significant things and mere detail." 
 
 — T/ie School Review. 
 
 " Professor Graves does well to give the profession the fruit of his abundant 
 knowledge in a scholarly text-book and reference work, complete without be- 
 ing tedious, condensed without being lifeless." — Journal of Education. 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York 
 
Great Educators of Three Centuries 
 
 By frank PIERREPONT GRAVES, Ph.D. 
 
 Professor of the History of Education in the 
 Ohio State University 
 
 This book furnishes a popular account of the Hfe and work of 
 the men who, during the past three centuries, have introduced 
 various innovations and reforms into modern education. While 
 the facts of biography are narrated somewhat at length, an effort 
 has been made to eliminate everything that does not have some 
 bearing upon the contributions of the educator under consideration. 
 
 " As history is largely a matter of biography, and as institutions are usually 
 the lengthened shadow of a man, so the historic trend of education can be 
 indicated well enough for the casual reader by an intelligent summary of the 
 work of a few great educators, together with comments on the tendencies and 
 interrelations of that work. Professor Graves has gotten up such a summary 
 in his brief volume, in which he has judiciously selected and clearly stated his 
 facts. His comments on these facts are illumination and his comments would 
 seem to be well founded." — Boston Evening Transcript. 
 
 "The thoroughly painstaking method of Professor Graves is evident on 
 every page of these splendidly written books. A scientific and scholarly atti- 
 tude combined with common-sense makes these by all odds the most practical 
 text-books yet published in this field." — President W. G. Clippinger, of 
 Otterbein University. 
 
 "The social settings, dialectic methods, and ultimate achievements of 
 nearly a score of illustrious world reformers are here brilliantly outlined." — 
 The Philadelphia North American. 
 
 " Some of those who are complaining about present-day teaching have not 
 the slightest notion of the origins of modern practice. . . . Partisans in 
 either camp will do well to read Professor Graves's new book, which should 
 help the layman to understand contemporary educational aims and practices." 
 — Professor M. V. O'Shka in The Dial. 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York 
 
By WILLIAM HAWLEY SMITH 
 
 All the Children of All the People 
 
 A Study of the Attempt to Educate Everybody 
 
 Cloth i2mo 306 pages Index $^.30 net ; by mail, $1.61 
 
 The task of trying to educate everybody which our pubUc 
 schools are attempting to perform, has proved far more diffi- 
 cult than the originators of the system deemed it would be 
 when they set out upon the undertaking. The author gives 
 this problem careful study and consideration and his book 
 will prove an invaluable help toward its successful solution. 
 
 By frank LOUIS SOLDAN 
 
 Late Superintendent of Schools, St. Louis, Mo. 
 
 The Century and the School 
 
 AND OTHER EDUCATIONAL ESSAYS 
 
 Cloth i2mo $1.25 net ; by mail, $1.33 
 
 The essays brought together in this volume were selected 
 by a group of the late Superintendent Soldan's intimate asso- 
 ciates. The titles are : The Century and the School ; Mo- 
 rality and Education ; What is a Fad .■' ; Teachers' Duties ; 
 Educational Ideas in Dickens' Novels ; A Visit to German 
 Schools ; Reading in the Higher Grades ; Folklore and 
 Fairy Tales. 
 
 THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 
 Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York 
 

PETER RAMUS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 EDUCATIONAL REFORMATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SIXTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK PIERREPONT GRAVES 
 
 A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the 
 
 requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 
 
 in the Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia 
 
 University 
 
 NEW YORK 
 1912