gressive development. Dr. James, who wrote his Apology' in 1608, Dr. Vaughan and Mr. Le Bas, the authors of the 'Life of Wiclif;' Chancellor Massingberd in his 'History of the Reformation;' Dean Milman in his 'History of Latin Christianity; Dean Hook, who has erred in following the Church historian Milner, are for one or other of these reasons, or from the want of information obtained since their time, no longer trustworthy authorities on the subject.* The late Professor Shirley, of Oxford, contributed to our knowledge of Wiclif by a catalogue of his works which he has ascertained to be genuine, with the dates of the years when some of them were written, as well as by an introduction to the 'Fasciculi Zizaniorum,' or 'John Wiclif's Tares,' a collection of documents, the work of T. Netter, of Walden, Wiclif's opponent. The 'Select English Works' have been printed by the University Press at Oxford, and have been edited by Mr. T. Arnold; and other English works, omitted by Arnold, have been published by Mr. F. Matthew for the Early English Text Society. A foreigner, Dr. Lechler, has also written a 'Life,' the result chiefly of an examination of the unpublished Latin manuscripts at Vienna. After the death of Anne of Bohemia, the wife of Richard II., these manuscripts were taken by her followers to that country, where they aided the Hussite movement, in the fifteenth century. A German Professor, wishing to revive this interest in Germany, is said to be engaged on a translation of Canon Pennington's Life of Wiclif' into German, a book that the Empress Frederick of Germany has placed in the hands of the gentleman charged with the religious instruction of her family. The manuscripts were afterwards kept in the Bohemian monasteries, until the abolition of these about a hundred years ago by Joseph II. They were then transferred to the Imperial Library at Vienna. Professor Lorimer produced out of Dr. Lechler's work just so much as comprises the biography of Wiclif and his predecessors in England, and enriched it with valuable notes. The Wyclif Society has been founded for the purpose of removing from England the disgrace of having left in manuscript the most important works of her great early Reformer.† One of the most valuable of these is the 'Summa in Theologia,' 6 Wiclif's Place in History,' by Professor Burrows, pp. 3-4, 24-38, an instructive and interesting work, where we find an excellent sketch of Wiclif's biographers. + We strongly urge the claim of this Society to the support which it needs for the completion of its work. The secretary is J. W. Standerwick, Esq., General Post Office, London, and the publishers are Trübner & Co. containing containing his Theory of Dominion, without which we cannot fully understand his position. Leland, our only authority in the matter, gives two accounts of the origin and birth-place of Wiclif. He says that he was born at Spreswell, or Ipreswell, a good mile from Richmond in Yorkshire, and again that he derived his origin '—' originem duxit'-from the village of Wycliffe, ten miles distant from Richmond. After much research it seems that Wiclif was born a few years before 1324 at Hipswell (evidently the modern name for Ipreswell), and that he derived his origin from, or was a member of, the family of the Wycliffes of Wycliffe, who had been settled in the parish from the Norman conquest. Leland's two accounts thus seem to be reconciled.* We have no information as to Wiclif's early education, nor as to the exact time when he went to the University of Oxford. Dr. Lechler, assuming him to have been born in 1320, thinks that, unlike many of his contemporaries, who were mere boys when they entered Oxford, he could not have gone to it earlier than 1335, at the age of 15; because his parents would imagine that, on account of the great distance of Wycliffe from the University, and the danger of travelling in those days, he would pass for ever from their control. They would, therefore, wait till they had prepared him by proper teaching, to withstand the temptations of the University. The common idea hitherto has been that Wiclif went first to Queen's College, that afterwards he was admitted to Merton, that from Merton he proceeded to Balliol, where he became Master in 1361, and that then he became Warden of Canterbury Hall. But his connection with three of these colleges has been disputed. The only point on which all are agreed is that he became Master of Balliol. If he went to Oxford in 1335, he could not have become a member of Queen's; for it was not founded till 1340. Besides, an examination of the bursar's rolls at Queen's College shows that no trace of his residence at Queen's is to be found till 1363, when he occupied rooms in the college. He continued to reside in Oxford in various years from 1363 to 1380. We should like to know the influences at Oxford which served to mould his character and to develop his abilities. Mr. Anstey in his work, 'Munimenta Academica,' enables us to a certain extent to trace them. He would be obliged to attend lectures. He must at first have dispensed with books, for they * Lewis's 'Life of Wiclif,' Oxford, 1820, first published in 1720, is still occasionally useful. He is wrong, however, in placing Wiclif's birth in 1324. were were a costly luxury. He would afterwards repeat what he had learnt. He would, in his third year, attend in the schools for the purpose of taking part in the public disputations. The course of study, through which he had to pass, consisted of logic, rhetoric, grammar, and arithmetic. At the end of four years came the determination,' or the examination for the degree of Bachelor of Arts. This name took its rise from the supreme importance attached to the science of logic and to disputations in those days, the candidate being expected to determine certain questions which were submitted to him. The studies for the degree of Master of Arts, which might be taken in three years from the degree of Bachelor of Arts, were geometry, astronomy, music, and natural, moral, and metaphysical philosophy. But they did not include a knowledge of Greek. We come to this conclusion from the frequent mistakes in the writing of Greek words to be found in Wiclif's works. We have no certain evidence as to his instructors in theology. He followed the course prescribed by the University, and attended, first of all, lectures on the Bible, and afterwards on the Scholastic Philosophy. So great was the importance attached to the latter, that Bachelors and Doctors of Theology were required to give lectures, first on the Sentences of Peter the Lombard, and afterwards on Holy Scripture. Wiclif was the last giant among the Schoolmen. He associated, however, the study of the Scriptures so closely with the study of the Scholastic Philosophy, that he was known as the 'Evangelical Doctor.' We see in this preference for Holy Scripture. the cause of his subsequent doctrinal development. The study of the Scholastic Philosophy would also, by developing his intellectual powers, prepare him for his future work as the Reformer of the Church. We must remember, likewise, in connection with this part of our subject, the high honour conferred on the successful students of the Scholastic Philosophy. general returning, crowned with laurels from some well-fought battle-field, was not received with greater honour than the student who came off victorious from the combat in the Schools. Wiclif would thus, as the most distinguished student of that philosophy, gain great influence with his contemporaries, when he came forward to oppose first the abuses, and then the dogmas, of the Church of Rome. A Dr. Lechler conjectures, that Wiclif went to Balliol because it was founded by the noble family of Balliol, of Barnard Castle, not far from Wiclif's birth-place; and because two Fellows of Balliol were presented to the parish by John Wycliffe of Wycliffe as patron. If this supposition is correct, we might Vol. 168.-No. 336. suppose that his residence at it had been continuous, if we had not been confronted with an entry at Merton in 1356, that John Wiclif was steward of the week, which implies that he was, as Dr. Shirley states, a Fellow of considerable standing. Dr. Lorimer gives us the information from a memorandum among the archives, that Wiclif was certainly Master of Balliol in May, 1360.* After the completion of his academical course he remained at Oxford, engaged in the unostentatious discharge of University duties. From several passages of his writings, we gather that he gave lectures with great success on logic and philosophy. We cannot go into this part of his work, till all his philosophical treatises have been printed. At present we have before us only the De Compositione Hominis,' lately published by the Wyclif Society, consisting probably of lectures given before the University in 1360, which were written down by some scholar who heard them. This work could not have been much interrupted after his appointment to the living of Fillingham in 1361, when he resigned the Mastership of Balliol, for we find from an entry in the episcopal register at Lincoln in 1368, that the Bishop gave him leave of absence from his parish for two years, that he might devote himself to his studies at Oxford. Some time between 1367 and 1374 he became Doctor of Theology, and could, if he pleased, open a hall and give lectures to as many as chose to come to him. A few dates and names, obtained from parchment rolls with some difficulty, and statements made by himself and others, with the inferences from them, alone enable us to trace him during this period. An inference may be fairly drawn from the following statement of Walsingham, the Chronicler of St. Albans, under the year 1377. 6 About the same time arose in the University of Oxford, a certain Northernman, called Master John Wiclif.' A division into nations' prevailed during the middle ages in the Universities of Europe. In Oxford the division was into the Northern and Southern 'nations.' The Northern 'nation' included generally the Scots and those who lived in the North of England, and the Southern nation' the Irish, the Welsh, and those who lived in the South of England. So fierce was the antagonism between the parties that they often disturbed the public peace by their bloody fights in the streets. On one occasion, as Wood informs us, on the election of a Chancellor, Lorimer's note to Lechler, vol. i., p. 186 (First Edition). the the Southern party forced their way into St. Mary's Church, kicking and cudgelling, and severely wounding those of the Northern party opposed to the Chancellor from Merton College whom the former party had selected.* These fights do not represent mere frays or disputes of young men after a carouse, but important religious or political principles. We find that the resistance to the Papacy came from the Northern party; while the Southern party were its supporters. Wiclif, as a Northernman, had made common cause with the Northern party, and had thus become animated with that spirit which led him to stand forward in defence of civil and religious liberty and independence. Wiclif was supposed for many centuries to have been the Warden of Canterbury Hall, and to have been dismissed from it by Archbishop Langham in favour of the monks. But in 1841, Mr. Courthope made the discovery, that a John Wyclyve was the Vicar of Mayfield, in Sussex, from 1361 to 1380. Now, as it was certain that the Reformer was never Vicar of Mayfield, and that the Vicar of Mayfield was never Master of Balliol, the question arose whether the Vicar might not have been the Fellow of Merton, and the Warden of Canterbury Hall. A controversy on the subject was carried on for some time, in which the late Professor Shirley took a prominent part. He wrote a long note in Fasciculi Zizaniorum,' in which he endeavours to prove that Wyclyve of Mayfield was the Fellow of Merton, and the Warden of Canterbury Hall. Dean Hook, following him, wrote in his 'Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury': 'Canterbury Hall has a place in history from its connection with the great Reformer, John Wiclif, a notion which is now exploded.' He added in a note, 'I assume it as a fact, now admitted by all who have examined the subject, that the Warden of Canterbury Hall is a distinct person from the great Reformer.'† A strong argument against that view is supplied by the 'Chronicon Angliæ,' one of the original chronicles of the period, in the series of chronicles and memorials of Great Britain and Ireland in the middle ages, brought out under the direction of the Master of the Rolls. It contains,' as Mr. Thompson of the British Museum, who discovered and edited it in 1874, states, an important detailed history of the close of Edward III.'s and the beginning of Richard II.'s reign, which is now printed for the first time, and has hitherto been considered lost." In it occurs the following passage: : *Wood's History and Antiquities of Oxford,' vol. i. p. 448. "The |