0"T' LAERT> "! - USP

394". RECENT TIMES.'
of Herborn STEUBING states: "Not only was the high;
school completely split up into factions, but, besides this,?
one professor was opposed to another. They not only-,
taunted one another whenever they could in their lectures,;
but even carried on their feuds in the presence of thegoverningbody."*
Relations of this kind existed even a
century later; when in 1760 a professor complained to the
senate of the University of Ingolstadt that he had been.
insulted by the medical faculty, the latter declared:
" that they certainly did consider him—the plaintiff—a low
fellow, on account of his mean practices, but that they had*
no recollection whatever of having at any time called him/ ,
so, officially."t
It was to be expected that a reaction would set in against; ,
this growing barbarism in manners and social intercourse^
The University of Gottingen took the initiative in recom-.
mending its students to adopt polite behaviour. The- .
manners of the French, which had everywhere been adopted.
at the courts of princes, were taken as a pattern. That
Which the students belonging to the higher circles learned 4 ;|
to value soon found favour with the rest. And thus among
a proportion of the students of Germany the praiseworthy
endeavour was made to grace social life by pleasing
formalities. Those possessing the rudeness of manners;
which were displayed at many high schools, chiefly of the
smaller class, regarded this innovation with scorn, characterizing
it as foppery and an unpatriotic aping of foreign,
usages. Even grave historians have shared this view, and
have attached too little importance to the fact that a reform"
in this direction was required. The German race, without?
a doubt, owes very much to the circumstance that it haS.
always been intent upon improving its deficiencies and,
learning alike from friends and from foes.
In the beginning of.the 17th century the general educa^
tion of students embraced the Latin, Greek,, and Hebrew
languages, arithmetic with some mathematics, Church
* THOLUCK op. cit. i, 1, 140. cf PRA"NTL op. cit,, i,.6p%