which were so prominent in Paris, never attained much importance in Italian universities, and exercised no influence on their constitution.

Among the officers of the universities the rectors occupied the first place. For a long time two rectors were elected, one for each university; this was the case not only in the oldest period, but is spoken of as late as 1402 and 1423. Afterwards both universities had but one rector, which arrangement appears as early as 1514, and after 1552 was the permanent rule. The qualifications for the rectorate were as follows: he must be a "scholar" (clericus,) unmarried, not a monk (nullius religionis appareat,) twenty-five years of age, of sufficient property, and was also required to have studied law, at his own expense, for at least five years. Under scholar" this law undoubtedly included also the professor, who, as a rule, enjoyed all the privileges of a scholar. A licentiate, and, in 1423, a professor, are mentioned as rectors. "Clericus" may perhaps here designate a student or literatus, not a priest; at least the right to bear arms, given in the same statute, does not apply to the priesthood. Besides, the school of Bologna had risen without any clerical coöperation, and the analogy of the Paris university, which from the first had a far more clerical character than that at Bologna, but yet did not require its rector to be a priest, furnishes further evidence of this.

A new election for rector took place annually. The last rector, the members of the council, and a number of additional electors, appointed by the entire university, were the voters, and the rector had to be chosen from certain nations, for which purpose their order of succession had been generally fixed. Great care was taken to secure to the rector a brilliant rank. He took precedence of not only the archdeacon of Bologna, but, with the exception of the bishop of Bologna, of all bishops and archbishops, even of the cardinals who were students, and this rank was recognized in papal decrees. At first they had no special honorary title; but later additions to the statutes, from the end of the 15th century, confer the title of magnificus. A brief from pope Pius IV from the year 1563 gives to each retired rector the right to demand a position in the States of the Church or the Romagna, and threatens the governors of these provinces, who fail to fulfill this law, with a fine of 1.000 ducats.

Under the jurisdiction of the rectors were all the members of the university, and only as far as their relation to this was doubtful, as with the Bolognese, could the jurisdiction of the rectors be disputed. German students alone were exempt. But this civil jurisdiction was indisputable, if both parties were scholars or doctors, or where only the accused was a member of the university, and the plaintiff, of his own free will, made complaint to the rector, for the members of the universities could not refuse to try the case without infringing upon the statutes they had sworn to maintain; but if the foreign plaintiff would not make complaint before the rector, the case was doubtful. The university maintained that the rector even then had jurisdiction, and demanded from the magistracy of the city a solemn oath to keep in force the statutes of the university. But the city would not agree to this, and obliged its officers to execute the judgments of the rector only when both parties belonged to the university, as that jurisdiction, being based on the statutes exclusively, could have no binding power on the citizens, and the judges of the city, who would not respect the jurisdiction of the university, could only be threatened with exclusion from the latter. This dispute was undecided until papal decrees con

firmed the statutes unconditionally and declared them obligatory upon all. From this time final appeal was made to the papal governor, while previously an application could be made only to the councils of the nations, and from their decision an appeal to a court, consisting of the other rector and four counselors, had been permitted. A brief of pope Pius IV, from the year 1563, seems to extend the jurisdiction of the rector on all matters in which a student was a party, no matter whether as defendant or plaintiff, yet it is possible that here only the previous condition of things was confirmed, and a general expression was for this purpose made use of.

The criminal jurisdiction of rectors was subjected to similar doubts and disputes In minor offenses, especially those against the university, no scruples were raised, and they involved a fine or expulsion from the university. Fines (10) were formerly equally divided by the two rectors and universities, afterwards by the one rector and syndicus of the university. Expulsion (privatio) took away the privilege of hearing lectures, of obtaining degrees, and of exercising the profession of teacher. Those under patronage, as for instance librarians and copyists, were punished by being cut off from all business relations and contracts with the members of the university, without the latter being liable to punishment. In order to be able to expel foreigners also, as for instance citizens and magistrates of Bologna, the excluded individual could obtain no right against a scholar, and the exclusion extended even to his descendants, and every city which gave an office to him was also, with all its citizens, placed under the same prohibition. However, it was not difficult to get relief from the judgment, and a fine was then substituted. More disputes arose in criminal cases, as in these the public peace of the city was deeply concerned. For this reason the jurisdiction of the professors, which rested on imperial privilege, could not always be maintained; and much less could the city be expected to respect the jurisdiction of the rectors. In some cases this was remedied by special deliberations, as e. g. in the year 1302, by a large mixed court. The statutes conferred upon the rectors a jurisdiction even in criminal cases without limitation, and threatened the expulsion of all members of the university who withdrew themselves from this jurisdiction. The question was finally legally settled by a papal bull, in the year 1544, providing that the jurisdiction of rectors should exist only when the criminal as well as the injured person belonged to the university, cases of capital crimes being excepted. Thus the four judges, which the old constitution appointed for the scholars, occupied the following relations towards each other: if both parties were scholars, none could withdraw from the rector's jurisdiction; if only the defendant was a student, and the foreign plaintiff made complaint to the rector, the accused was obliged to submit to it; but if the other complained to the city judge, the accused had a right to acquiesce or demand a court of professors or bishops (which the statutes expressly permitted,) but the cause in this case could not be brought before the rector. This was afterwards changed, however, by the papal approval of the statutes of the university. Beside the rectors, the university possessed the following officers:

a. The councilors, i. e. representatives of the nations, generally one to each nation, but for some nations, two, who formed the rector's council or senate, and settled many affairs with him alone. The German nation was represented

by two councilors, who had the title of procurators, and exercised jurisdiction within their nation, to the exclusion of the rector and city courts.

b. The syndicus, who represented both universities at foreign courts. He was elected annually from the scholars, and was under the jurisdiction, not of the rector, but of the entire university, and received a salary of 12 liras, and later one-third of all forfeits and fines.

c. The notary, elected annually from the notaries of the city for both universities. He received certain fees and a salary of 40 liras.

d. The massarius, or treasurer of both universities, elected annually from the bankers of the city.

e. Two bidelli (beadles,) one for each university, elected every year.

The outward relations of the university to the city of Bologna show unmistakably that great value was attached to the preservation and prosperity of the school. This is indicated by privileges and liberties given to teachers and students; the former, if citizens of the city, were free from military service, and later from duties and taxes also; foreign teachers and scholars were treated as citizens of Bologna; and the city paid damages for robbery and assault, unless they could capture the evil-doers. Special laws provided for the amusement of the students. Thus a law from the year 1521 imposed on the Jews the annual payment of 104 liras to the jurists, of 70 liras to the artiste, with which sums a carnival-supper was provided for the students. According to ancient custom, the students, after the first snow had fallen, used to collect money from the doctors and other notables, and this matter was regulated with special care in the latter part of the 16th century by law. These collections were to be taken only by those selected by the university for the purpose, and only after the legate or vice-legate had made declaration that snow had really fullen. The money was not to be used for drinking and entertainments, but was to be deposited in a safe place, and expended to honor eminent professors with a painting or a statue in the university precincts. As frequent disputes resulted, the law determined that only one such monument should be erected annually.

Gambling was interdicted under a fine of 5 liras. Jealous watchfulness was exercised to prevent other large schools from prospering at the expense of Bologna. Every teacher was put under oath; by severe penalties it was sought to prevent any loss. Death and the confiscation of all property was the penalty on citizens who should persuade any scholars to study elsewhere; also on the native and salaried foreign professors (if the first were over fifty years of age, the latter within the term of their engagement,) in case they removed to another university. The general interests of the university in this regard were identical with that of the city, and no objection was made to these measures; yet the statutes defined expressly what should be done, if by a quarrel with the city the suspension of the university became necessary. The hiring of lodgings gave early cause of quarrel and of legal enactments. Four assessors of taxes were elected annually, two from the city, two from the students, who fixed the rent of rooms, and the proprietors were forbidden to ask more than this tax, as well as the professors and students to increase their rent. No scholar was permitted to drive out another, and every one had a right to remain for three years in the rooms he had rented. The proprietor who did not submit to this taxation was punished by interdiction of his house, and no student could rent from him; the same punishment was inflicted when a citizen made a false accusation

against a scholar, and was extended to the owners of neighboring houses, whenever a scholar was injured or robbed. That foreign students might not lose time in looking for lodgings, the notary of the university always kept a complete list of all apartments for rent. Students were not permitted to stand godfather in any family of the city and its surroundings, without the permission of the rector: at first only J. Andreä and his descendants were exempted from this limitation; but later the male descendants of any doctor of Bologna. For the maintenance of its rights, the university received from time to time special papal conservators, which custom, however, appears not to have been permanent. In 1310 the archbishop of Ravenna, and the bishops of Ferrara and of Parma, were appointed; in 1322 and 1326, the bishop of Bologna.

In considering the university as a school, two subjects are to be discussed: the personnel, i. e. the doctors and teachers, and their duties, consisting in lectures, repetitions, and disputations. The various opinions as to the origin of the title of doctor, have generally overlooked the fact that in a short time, even in the same institution, its meaning has very much changed. At the foundation of the law-school of Bologna, doctor, magister, or dominus, was, no doubt, the name by which Irnerius and his immediate successors were designated; an office or a dignity acquired it could not mean, because such did not then exist. Irnerius himself, in old documents, is named index, or causidicus; by contemporary historians also magister, but nowhere doctor. The more modern Walfredus is called doctor, magister, and index. After the school had existed for some time, and attained a solid foundation by having several eminent teachers at one time, viz., about the middle of the 12th century, the dignity of doctor appears to have been assumed only when bestowed by special act, which circumstance may be attributed to the fact that by the privilege granted by king Frederic I, the professors of the law-school had a sort of juridical authority. The title, as far as may be inferred from later times, was given the doctors when, after an examination, they found the candidate worthy to enter their ranks. This admission, called promotion, gave an unlimited right to teach, in connection with jurisdiction by each teacher over his scholars, and also the right to participate in the giving of degrees, i. e. a place in the faculty of promotion. Yet at that time the right of teaching was not exclusively reserved to the doctors, for in the 12th century teachers appear without that title. At the end of the 12th century, doctors of canonic law (Decretorum) were created, but they did not enjoy equal privileges until some time afterwards. During the 13th century, doctores medicinæ (or fixicæ,) grammaticæ, logica, philosophiæ et aliarum artium, and even notariæ, were created. Professors of law were sometimes also styled magister and magisterium, but they considered the title of doctor as their own, while other teachers were to be styled mayistri only. In later times, for selfish reasons, the participation in the privileges of doctors was more and more limited, and this may have been the principal cause of the rapid and permanent inner decay of the school The highest professorships were to be filled from native families, and this regulation was adopted as a statute, though the university opposed it without success. It also became a custom to adopt only native Bolognese into the faculty of promotion, so that among the Bolognese this reception and the promotion were inseparably connected. A narrowness similar to that shown here by the native-born towards foreigners, manifested itself, to great harm to the schools, among the members

of the faculty towards their fellow-citizens, since they took an oath not to promote any other Bolognese but their own sons, brothers, and nephews, by which they intended to make the dignity of doctor hereditary in their own families. But the interest of the city identified itself with that of the university of the students in acting against the faculty, and thus, in 1295, the faculty obtained consent to the promotion of six Bolognese only under condition that they were not relatives of members of the faculty. The dispute became much more warm in 1299, when Vianesius Pascipoverus, a Bolognese, not belonging to the family of any of the faculty, sought promotion. The faculty declined on account of the above-mentioned oath; but the city, called upon by the rector, forced them to consent, under menace of a fine of 100 liras. The same dispute was renewed when, in 1304, several Bolognese sought promotion, at which time the city again threatened the faculty with a fine of 1,000 liras, and every member with a fine of 300 liras. The faculty submitted, and after this time no similar case occurred; but a way was found by which the faculty, in the main, obtained its object, by separating the membership of the faculty from the dignity of doctor, and by limiting the faculty to a certain number of members, who were to be specially elected. By these events, relations became more strictly defined, and we must now treat of them in detail; first of the doctors, and, while treating of them, of the narrow circle formed by the faculty of promotion, then of the teachers of the law-school.

The degree of doctor was given in either Roman or canon law, or in both; in the former more often in older times. Of the canonist six years of study were required; of the civilist, eight years; a lecture or repetition delivered by him was counted as one year's study, and if he had attended lectures on canon law during three or four years, one or two years less were required. He was obliged to testify on oath as to this period of study. After this the candidate selected a doctor, who presented him to the archdeacon; he could also elect two persons to present him; three, however, not without the consent of the

rector.

The examination of candidates was two-fold: the examen (privata examinatio) and the conventus (publica examinatio ;) each examination conferring a special rank.

Before the examination, two texts (puncta assignata) were given to the candidate, both from the Roman, or both from the canon law, or one from the Roman, the other from the canon law, according as he intended to be promoted in one or both faculties. On the invitation of the archdeacon, the examination was held on the same day, when the candidate read his composition on the texts. The presiding doctor, as it appears, examined him alone; the other doctors could offer suggestions and questions on the written treatises, and had to declare, under oath, that no understanding existed between them and the candidate. The doctors were instructed to treat the candidate kindly, as if an own son, under penalty of one year's suspension. Immediately after the examination the doctors took a vote, and if the candidate was declared worthy, he received the title of licentiate.

The conventus, or public examination, which conferred the degree of doctor, took place in the cathedral church, whither they went in solemn procession. There the licentiate delivered a lecture on law, over which the students, not the doctors, held a dispute with him. Then followed an address of the archdeacon