Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 23.djvu/885

Rh communities. A formal pedantry and unintelligent method of study, combined with a passionate dogmatism in matters of religious belief, and a rude contempt for the amenities of social intercourse, became the leading characteristics, and lasted throughout the 17th century. But in the year 1693 the foundation of the university of Halle opened up a career to two very eminent men, whose influence, widely different as was its character, may be compared for its effects with that of Luther and Melanchthon, and served to modify the whole current of German philosophy and German theology. Halle has indeed been described as "the first real modern university." It was really indebted for its origin to a spirit of rivalry between the conservatism of Saxony and the progressive tendencies of the house of Brandenburg, but the occasion of its rise was the removal of the ducal court from Halle to Magdeburg. The archbishopric of the latter city having passed into the possession of Brandenburg in 1680 was changed into a dukedom, and the city itself was selected as the ducal residence. This change left unoccupied some commodious buildings in Halle, which it was decided to utilize for purposes of education. A "Ritterschule" for the sons of the nobility was opened, and in the course of a few years it was decided to found a university. Saxony endeavoured to thwart the scheme, urging the proximity of Leipsic; but her opposition was overruled by the emperor Leopold I., who granted (19th October 1693) the requisite charter, and in the following year the work of the university commenced. Frankfort-on-the-Oder had by this time become a centre of the Reformed party, and the primary object in founding a university in Halle was to create a centre for the Lutheran party, but its character, under the influence of its two most notable teachers, Christian Thomasius and A. H. Francke, soon expanded beyond the limits of this conception to assume a highly original form. Thomasius and Francke had both been driven from Leipsic owing to the disfavour with which their liberal and progressive tendencies were there regarded by the academic authorities, and on many points the two teachers were in agreement. They both regarded with contempt alike the scholastic philosophy and the scholastic theology; they both desired to see the rule of the civil power superseding that of the ecclesiastical power in the seats of learning; they were both opposed to the ascendency of classical studies as expounded by the humanists—Francke regarding the Greek and Roman pagan writers with the old traditional dislike, as immoral, while Thomasius looked upon them with contempt, as antiquated and representing only a standpoint which had been long left behind; both again agreed as to the desirability of including the elements of modern culture in the education of the young. But here their agreement ceased. It was the aim of Thomasius, as far as possible, to secularize education, and to introduce among his country men French habits and French modes of thought; his own attire was gay and fashionable, and he was in the habit of taking his seat in the professorial chair adorned with gold chain and rings, and with his dagger by his side. Francke, who became the leader of the Pietists, regarded all this with even greater aversion than he did the lifeless orthodoxy traditional in the universities, and was shocked at the worldly tone and disregard for sacred things which characterized his brother professor. Both, however, commanded a considerable following among the students. Thomasius was professor in the faculty of jurisprudence, Francke in that of theology. And it was a common pre diction in those days with respect to a student who pro posed to pursue his academic career at Halle, that he would infallibly become either an atheist or a Pietist. But the services rendered by Thomasius to learning were genuine and lasting. He was the first to set the example, soon after followed by all the universities of Germany, of lecturing in the vernacular instead of in the customary Latin; and the discourse in which he first departed from the traditional method was devoted to the consideration of how far the German nation might with advantage imitate the French in matters of social life and intercourse. His more general views, as a disciple of the Cartesian philosophy and founder of the modern Rationalismus, exposed him to incessant attacks; but by the establishment of a monthly journal (at that time an original idea) he obtained a channel for expounding his views and refuting his antagonists which gave him a great advantage. On the influence of Francke, as the founder of that Pietistic school with which the reputation of Halle afterwards became especially identified, it is unnecessary here to dilate. J. C. Wolf, who followed Thomasius as an assertor of the new culture, was driven from Halle by the accusations of the Pietists, who declared that his teaching was fraught with atheistical principles. In 1740, however, he was recalled by Frederick II., and reinstated in high office with every mark of consideration and respect. Throughout the whole of the 18th century Halle was the leader of academic thought and culture in Protestant Germany, although sharing that leadership, after the middle of the century, with Göttingen. The university of Göttingen (named after its founder "Georgia Augusta") was endowed with the amplest privileges as a university by George II. of England, elector of Hanover, 7th December 1736. The imperial sanction of the scheme had been given three years before (13th January 1733), and the university was formally opened 17th September 1737. The king himself assumed the office of "rector magnificentissimus," and the liberality of the royal endowments (doubling those of Halle), and the not less liberal character of the spirit that pervaded its organization, soon raised it to a foremost place among the schools of Germany. Halle had just expelled Wolf; and Göttingen, modelled on the same lines as Halle, but rejecting its Pietism and disclaiming its intolerance, appealed with remarkable success to the most enlightened feeling of the time. It included all the faculties, and two of its first professors—Mosheim, the eminent theologian, from Helmstädt, and Böhmer, the no less distinguished jurist, from Halle—together with Gesner, the man of letters, at once established its reputation. Much of its early success was also due to the supervision of its chief curator (there were two), Baron Münchausen, himself a man of considerable attainments, who by his sagacious superintendence did much to promote the general efficiency of the whole professoriate. Not least among its attractions was also its splendid library, located in an ancient monastery, and now containing over 200,000 volumes and 5000 MSS. In addition to its general influence as a distinguished seat of learning, Göttingen may claim to have been mainly instrumental in diffusing a more adequate conception of the importance of the study of history. Before the latter half of the 18th century the mode of treatment adopted by university lecturers was singularly wanting in breadth of view. Profane history was held of but little account, excepting so far as it served to illustrate ecclesiastical and sacred history, while this, again, was invariably treated in the narrow spirit of the polemic, intent mainly on the defence of his own confession, according as he represented the Lutheran or the Reformed Church. The labours of the professors at Göttingen, especially Putter, Gatterer, Schlözer, and Spittler, combined with those of Mascov at Leipsic, did much towards promoting both a more catholic treatment and a wider scope. Not less beneficial was the example set at Göttingen of securing the appointment of its professors by a less prejudiced and partial body than a university