Holyband, like his predecessor Du Ploich, was an advocate of the practical teaching of languages. A perfect knowledge of French, in his eyes, consisted in being able to read and pronounce the language accurately. Thus the first thing to be done by those desiring to study the language is to begin to read at once. The learner must not "entangle himself at the first brunte" with rules; but, "after he hath read them over, let him take in hand the dialogues, and as occasion requireth he shall examine the rules, applying their use unto his purpose."[370] He must first "frame his tongue by reading them aloud, noting carefully which letters are not pronounced, looking for the reasons why they are lefte in the rules of pronunciation," so that "when he shall happen uppon other bookes printed without these caracters he may remember which letters ought to be uttered and which ought not." In these rules[371] Holyband endeavours to explain French sounds by comparison with English sounds. His treatment of the letter a may be given as an example of his method. "Sound our a," he says,[372] "as you sound the first sillable in Laurence, or Augustine in English. When a is joined with in it loseth his sound, or at the least it is very little heard: as pain, hautain.... Pronounce then as if they were written thus: pin, hautin.... But if e followeth n, then i goeth more towards n, thus: balaine, semaine ...," and then he proceeds to describe in like fashion the sounds of the diphthong ai. His treatment of the sound gn is quaint and interesting. "When you find any word written with gn, remember how you pronounce these English words, onion, minion, companion, and such like: so melting g, and touching smoothly the roofe of the mouth with the flat of the tongue, say: mignon, oignon, compagnon; say then, cam-pa-gne, campa-gnie, and not cam-pag-ne, campag-nie, separating g from n; but rather sound them as if they were written thus in your English tongue, campaine, campanie."

Such rules alone, however, were of little value in Holyband's opinion, and we cheerfully agree with him. The reader must be very circumspect in his use of them, and his teacher a very skilful Frenchman, "or else all will go to wracke." He seems to have thought that much more depended on the tutor than on rules. No doubt he fully shared the opinion stated earlier by Duwes, that rules are of more use to the teacher than the learner. "Oh how busie is this tongue," he says of French, "and into what maze doth the learner enter which doth take it in hand: therefore let his tutor be sevenfold skilfull." We are prepared, then, to find Holyband agreeing with Henry VIII.'s tutor on another point—the teaching of French and writing of French grammars by the English. To him it appeared obvious that "it is not the part of a stranger, except he be learned and of a long continuance in France, to give precepts concerning the pronunciation of the (French) tongue: yea neither of the best Frenchmen, be he never so learned or eloquent in the same, except he hath practised the premises by teaching or otherwise by a long and diligent observation." There can be no question of committing rules to memory; they merely serve to throw light on the reading matter. Yet the practice of memorizing is not neglected. There were two purposes for which it was called into use, the verbs, chiefly the two auxiliaries, and vocabulary, to which Holyband attached much importance.

According to Holyband himself, his method had excellent results. He was especially proud of the pronunciation of his pupils. In teaching this he followed a plan which strikes the modern reader as curious, but which had already been employed in an early sixteenth-century grammar, that of the poet Alexander Barclay. According to this plan he taught his scholars the main characteristics of the different dialects of France, as well as the pure French in which they were encouraged to speak. His reason for doing so was to put them on their guard against the variety of dialects, chiefly Picard and Walloon, spoken by the numerous refugees FRENCH CHURCH SCHOOLSscattered all over London. When new scholars came to his school from "other French schools," he assures us that on hearing them speak and pronounce any letter incorrectly, his own pupils "spie the faultes as soone as I, yea they cannot abide it: and which is more they will discerne whether the maister which taught them first was a Burgonian, a Norman, or a Houyet."

The reading, which Holyband made the basis of his language teaching, was always explained by means of English renderings. In his dialogues he makes no attempt to retain the purity of the English phrase. English for him was merely a vehicle for interpreting to his young scholars the meaning of the French, "for I do not pretend to teach them any other thing then the French tongue," and so he begs his readers not to "muse" at the English of his book, but to take the French with such goodwill as it is offered. It will be noticed that on this point, as on many others—placing the rules after the practical exercises, for instance—Holyband resembles Du Ploich, and no doubt he was acquainted with the Treatise of his less well known fellow-teacher. The points of resemblance between the dialogues of the two works are sufficient proof of this, although Du Ploich's cannot compare with Holyband's in interest. Another work which had some influence on his dialogues was the Linguae Latinae Exercitatio of the great Spanish scholar and educationist Vives—a book containing Latin dialogues, dealing with the life of the schoolboy at home and at school, at work and at play. This was a very popular school-book in the sixteenth century, and was most likely used by Holyband in the Latin lessons at his own school. He also incorporated the Latin dialogues of Vives in a work which he called the Campo di Fior, or flowery field of four languages, Italian, Latin, French and English, giving the dialogues in these four languages. This work appeared in 1583, when he was probably still teaching in St. Paul's Churchyard.[373]

Besides these French schools kept by private individuals, there were others in connexion with the French churches. After the foundation of the French Church in Threadneedle Street, other churches had arisen in different parts of the country. The education of the children attending these institutions had to be seen to, and very soon schools were established under the supervision of the churches themselves.[374] Although these schools were primarily intended for the instruction of the children of the refugees, they also undertook to teach those "who would wish to learn the French language." Just as some English attended the services of the French Church, so also some sent their children to the school associated with it. And it must be remembered that to some Englishmen the French Church presented greater attractions than the English Church did at that time; for there naturally grew up a bond of sympathy between the Protestant refugees and the English Nonconformists, many of whom sought in the French Church, with its Genevan discipline, a form of worship not sanctioned by the English Church. Others attended these churches for the same reason as the "Italianate gentleman," censured by Roger Ascham,[375] went to the Italian Church: "to heare the (French) tongue naturally spoken, not to heare God's doctrine trewly preached." This was a practice strongly advocated by many of the French teachers of the time. The number of Englishmen of both kinds must have been considerable. In 1573 Elizabeth issued an Order forbidding the French Church to give communion to those English who, by curiosity or dislike for their own ceremonies, wished to receive it in the French Church. The church in Threadneedle Street took steps to limit the number of its English adherents. These were required to produce evidence of a sober life, and of loyalty to their own church, before they were allowed to communicate.[376] English names are not uncommon in the Threadneedle Street Registers. Even members of the nobility stood as sponsors to the children of the French strangers, for instance, the Marquis of Hamilton, the Earl of Pembroke, and the Countess of Bedford, in the year 1624.[377] The French Church at Southampton also had numerous English members and communicants,[378] while at Canterbury a rule was made that all the English connected with the church should know French; on one occasion, a person was refused as a sponsor on account of his ignorance of that tongue.[379] Considering FRENCH SCHOOL AT CANTERBURYthe esteem in which the French churches were held by many Englishmen, we may assume that some of the latter were glad to take advantage of the willingness of the French Church to receive their children into its schools. The refugees, on their part, did not always send their children to their own schools. The sons of the wealthier strangers would go to the English grammar schools, and thence, in many cases, to the University.[380]

The subjects taught in these French church schools were, no doubt, much the same as those of the private French schools, including religious instruction, writing, reading, arithmetic, and possibly music. The curriculum appears to have been of quite an elementary nature. As to the teachers, they were required to be of sober life, and members of the French Church. They had to be appointed by the minister and presented to the bishop. They also were required to give the minister an account of the books they read to the children, and of the methods followed, and be willing to adopt the advice of their superiors "sans rien entreprendre à leur fantaisie." Further, it was their duty to conduct the children to church on Sunday for the catechism.[381] Such were the regulations laid down in the second Discipline, drawn up on the restoration of the French Church after the accession of Elizabeth. When this was revised some years later, in 1588, a few changes were made. The presentation to the bishop was dispensed with, and the teachers were no longer obliged to conduct the children to the catechism: they had only to prepare them to answer it. And the ministers, on their side, were required to visit the schools, accompanied by the elders and deacons, at least four times a year; their attention was specially called to "those who teach languages."[382]

The French teachers attached to the Church at Canterbury are those of whom we have most detailed information. In one of the articles of a petition, which the group of refugees there addressed to the city authorities, in the reign of Elizabeth, they crave that permission may be given to the schoolmaster whom they have brought with them to teach both their own youth and also other children who desire to learn the French tongue.[383] Their request appears to have been well received, as a French church and school were established not long after. Among the names of the petitioners was that of Vincent Primont, teacher of youth, who seems to have been the first schoolmaster of this little community. He was a refugee from Normandy, and arrived at Rye in 1572.[384] To the office of schoolmaster, which he held for many years, was added that of Reader to the congregation—a post he resigned in 1584, owing to some action of the consistory which did not meet with his approval. The last mention we have of him, as schoolmaster, occurs in December 1583, when a member of the congregation was reproved for allowing his workmen to set a bad example to Master Vincent's scholars. He probably filled his position for some time after this date. In August 1581, however, another teacher, Nicholas du Buisson, obtained permission "to go from house to house to teach children," and in 1583 received a small quarterly allowance for taking charge of the children at the services in the Temple.[385] The demand for teachers apparently increased considerably at this time; in 1582 we hear of a third schoolmaster, Paul Le Pipre, who had already been teaching for some time previous to this date. Le Pipre several times took steps to defend his monopoly and prevent the admission of other schoolmasters. In 1582 he opposed the application of Jan Roboem or Jean Robone, who sought permission to hold school. Roboem, who had been Reader in the French Protestant Church at Dieppe, fled thence to Rye in 1572, in company with his wife and two children.[386] He was in very poor estate on arriving at Canterbury, and the consistory of the French Church at last prevailed on Le Pipre to agree to his admission, promising him that if any disadvantage accrued to him thereby it should be remedied. Roboem was therefore told he might put his notice on the door of the Temple—the usual form of advertisement—whenever he pleased.[387] He did not, however, keep it there long, moving to London in the same year. He is no doubt to be identified with the John Robonin, "schoolmaster of the French tongue," who was living in the "Warde of Chepe," and attending the French Church, at the end of 1582.[388]

PAUL LE PIPREPaul Le Pipre was again approached in 1583 with regard to the appointment of another schoolmaster, probably a successor to Robonin. He was told that another teacher was necessary, and that one had come forward, a destitute refugee, who wished for permission to teach in order to earn his living. Le Pipre replied "that he held to his agreement with the Church, namely that he could not leave without giving three months' notice." Ultimately it was decided "that the aforesaid should not be permitted to keep school, both on account of the agreement and because he was not as yet sufficiently known to be of the religion." This teacher, whose name is not given, was, however, allowed to instruct "certain married people, and others grown up and over fourteen years of age who did not go to Paul's school, in consideration of his poverty."[389]

Paul Le Pipre retained the position he was so unwilling to share with a colleague, for many years after this. The last we hear of him is in September 1597, when he was censured by the consistory for holding school on Sunday.

French schools likewise arose in other provincial towns, where French Churches had been established. There were also, it appears, similar private schools, with the primary object of teaching French to the English, and unconnected with the churches. At any rate, French and Walloon schoolmasters arrived in some of these towns. At Rye in 1572, for instance, we come across Nicholas Curlew and Martin Martin, fugitives from Dieppe,[390] though probably, like Vincent Primont and John Robone, they did not settle in the town. At Norwich, in 1568, was a Pierre de Rieu of Lille who had arrived ten months before, and in 1622 Francis Boy and John Cokele.[391] At Dover, in the same year, Francis Rowland and Nicholas Rowsignoll, both French schoolmasters, had "come out of France by reason of the late troubles yet continuing."[392] And lastly, at Southampton, we hear in 1576 of Nicholas Chemin, who, in 1578, was refused communion at the church on account of his causing some disturbance in the congregation; of a M. Du Plantin, dit Antoine Ylot, in 1576, and of a Pierre de la Motte, 'mestre d'escolle,' in 1577.[393] No doubt most of these schoolmasters taught under the auspices of the French Churches.

M. Du Plantin was one of a large number of ministers who took refuge in England, and his school was probably a French Church school, for seven of his young scholars are mentioned as communicants. Many French pastors like him, no doubt, took to the teaching profession during their stay in England, their numbers being far in excess of the ministers needed in the churches. The famous reformer, John Utenhove of Ghent, was in 1549 tutor to the son of a London gentleman.[394] Valerand Poullain, a converted priest, who, after being pastor at Strasburg, came to England, for a time held a similar post in the household of the Earl of Derby;[395] he afterwards became minister of the French Church at Glastonbury on the recommendation of Utenhove. Another minister, Jean Louveau, Sieur de la Porte, spent the time of exile from his Church of Roche Bernard, after the massacre of St. Bartholomew, in teaching languages in London, and there were many others in like case.[396]

At Southampton there was a French school of special interest. Its teacher, like Du Plantin, was a pastor, though the school does not seem to have had any close connexion with the French Church. This schoolmaster and divine was the once famous Dr. Adrian Saravia, a learned refugee from Flanders. He became later Professor of Divinity at Leyden and an intimate friend of Casaubon; and when he took refuge in England for a second time in 1587, he enjoyed some ecclesiastical preferment, and was one of the translators of the Authorised Version of the Bible.[397] During his first sojourn in England, however, he was engaged on a more humble task. He first arrived at Southampton in about 1567,[398] after having been for some years headmaster of a grammar school in Guernsey. Saravia's school at Southampton was limited to sixteen or twenty youths of good family. It was a rule that all the scholars should speak French. Any one who used English, "though only a word," was obliged to wear a fool's cap at meals, and continue to wear it until he caught another in the same fault.[399] FRENCH SCHOOL AT SOUTHAMPTONTwo Englishmen, who later became well known as translators, acquired their knowledge of French in this school. One was Joshua Sylvester, famous for his translation of Du Bartas, and the other Robert Ashley, who turned Louis le Roy's De la Vicissitude ou Variété des choses de l'univers (1579) into English (1594). Sylvester informs us that he learnt his French at Saravia's school "in three poor years, at three times three years old"; "I have never been in France," he writes to his uncle, William Plumb, "whereby I might become so perfect." Elsewhere he expresses his affection for his master and his debt of gratitude to him:

Sylvester did not put his knowledge of French into practice only by translations into English. He also wrote some original verses in French; the sonnet with which he offered to James I. his translation of the works of Du Bartas, a poet for whom the king had a great admiration, will show his skill in a difficult art:

Another of Sylvester's contemporaries at Saravia's school was Sir Thomas Lake,[401] who became Secretary of State in the reign of James I., and is said to have read Latin and French to Queen Elizabeth towards the end of her reign. His French accent, unlike that of his schoolfellows, seems to have left much to be desired. In 1612 he incurred much ridicule by reading the French contract of marriage at the wedding of the Princess Elizabeth to the Elector with a very bad accent.

Saravia, it seems, encouraged his pupils to attend the French Church. Two of their names occur in the registers of the Church for the year 1576, viz. Nicholas Essard and Nicholas Carye, both probably Englishmen. Saravia himself and his wife were also regular attenders; in 1571 and again in 1576 he stood godfather at baptisms. The latest mention of him occurs in 1577. Usually the descriptive title "minister" is added after his name.[402] He is mentioned in the town records under the year 1576 as Master of the Grammar School, and in the following year the town paid 36s. "for four yardes of broade cloth for a gowne for Mr. Adrian Saravia the schoolmaster at 9s. the yarde."[403] Apparently he had abandoned his private school, although it is very likely that he continued to take private pupils into his house, and that the grammar school scholars had ample opportunity to learn French; but it is hardly probable that he introduced the language into the grammar school curriculum, where, no doubt, Latin retained its usual supremacy.[404]

Thus we see that in the England of the sixteenth century French had no footing in the ordinary schools, but was taught in a growing number of small private schools kept by Frenchmen, French-speaking refugees from the Netherlands, and sometimes by Englishmen.

In Scotland, on the other hand, French received more recognition in the grammar schools, although it did not form part of the ordinary curriculum, which was based on Latin, as in England. Yet in several schools its use was distinctly encouraged on lines which, we may conclude, were followed at Southampton grammar school in Saravia's time. For instance, the boys of Aberdeen grammar school, in the middle of the sixteenth century, were enjoined to address each other in French, while the use of the vernacular was forbidden. In the famous grammar school of Perth, when John Rowe, the reformer, was master there, and many of the scholars boarded with him, we are informed that "as they spake nothing in the schoole and fields but Latine so nothing was spoken in his house but French." It is of interest to note that in this school French is put side by side with FRENCH IN THE SCHOOLS OF SCOTLANDthe ancient tongues, as Palsgrave had wished. After meals a selection from the Bible was read; if from the Old Testament, in Hebrew, if from the New Testament, in Latin, Greek, or French.[405]

Turning to the more elementary education, we find French holding a still larger place in some of the parish schools of Scotland, where it was taught as part of the regular course by the side of Latin. An interesting account of one of these schools has been left by James Melville, in his diary.[406] He records that in 1566, at the age of seven, he, together with his elder brother, was sent to a school kept by a kinsman, minister at Logie, a few miles from Montrose. This "guid, lerned, kind man" attended to the children's education, while his sister was "a verie loving mother" to them, and to a "guid number of gentle and honest mens berns of the country about," who also were at the school. "Ther we lerned," he continues, "to reid the catechisme, prayers and scripture, to rehers the catechisme and prayers par cœur.... We lerned ther the Rudiments of the Latin grammar, with the vocables in Latin and French, also divers speitches in Frenche, with the reading and right pronunciation of that toung." Melville also assures us that his master had "a verie guid and profitable form of resolving the authors," and that he treated them "grammaticallie, bothe according to etymologie and syntaxe"; but, unfortunately, he gives us no further details on the teaching of French. After spending five years at this school, where, he admits, he learnt but little, "for his understanding was yet dark," he went to the grammar school at Montrose. There, although he had a French Protestant refugee, Pierre de Marsilliers, to teach him Greek, he does not appear to have had occasion to continue his study of the French tongue.

In Scotland, as in England, there were also special schools for teaching French. For instance, the French schoolmaster Nicholas Langlois, or Inglishe, who came to England in 1569, and in 1571 was installed in Blackfriars, London, with his wife and two children,[407] moved to Scotland in about 1574. He opened a French school in Edinburgh, which was subsidized by the Town Council, and where he taught French, arithmetic and accounts until the time of his death in 1611. The Town Council of Aberdeen also showed itself favourable to French schools; in 1635 it granted to a certain Alexander Rolland a licence "to teach a French school," and allowed him "for that effect to put up one brod or signe befoir his schoole door."

Yet in spite of the fact that French received greater recognition in the schools of Scotland than it did in those of England, there is nothing to show that the same general interest was taken in the study of the language. While in England large numbers of grammars and other text-books were published, there is only one notice of the production of a similar work in Scotland during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This solitary work, which a certain William Nudrye received a licence to print in 1559,[408] was entitled Ane A B C for Scottes men to read the frenche toung, with an exhortation to the nobles of Scotland to favour their old friends. The plea that French was learnt by the help of French grammars imported from France, or on conversational methods, or yet again in France by direct intercourse with Frenchmen, may be applied with as much force to England as to Scotland, though it is not improbable that in Scotland such methods were relied on to a greater extent; the friendly relations which existed between Scotland and France from the thirteenth century onwards encouraged large numbers of Scots to seek instruction in France, just as it led some Frenchmen to the Scottish centres of learning.[409] French tutors were said to be as common in Scotland as in England; a Spanish ambassador reported to Ferdinand and Isabella as early as 1498 that "there is a good deal of French education in Scotland, and many speak the French language." Yet the fact remains that while one small French A B C appears to have been the only work on the language issued in Scotland, there was a whole series of such works published in England.