¹ Frederick Temple, Rowland Williams, Baden Powell, Henry Bristow Wilson, C. W. Goodwin, Mark Pattison and Benjamin Jowett.

² Williams, Ellen, The Life and letters of Rowland Williams, D.D. (London, 1874), II, 30.Google Scholar

³ Kingsley, F. E., Charles Kingsley, His Letters and Memoirs of His Life (London, 1877), II, 80.Google Scholar

⁴ Abbott, Evelyn and Campbell, Lewis, The Life and Letters of Benjamin Jowett, M.A. (London, 1897), II 291.Google Scholar

⁵ This refers to a letter dated 12 Feb. 1861. The text of the letter can be found in Prothero, R. E. and Bradley, G. G., The Life and Correspondence of Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, D.D. (London, 1899), II, 36.Google Scholar

⁶ Imperial College, London, Huxley Collection, 22 63. Huxley and his friends, including Herbert Spencer and John Tyndall, later took a half facetious interest in defending Bishop Colenso.

⁷ Cornish, Francis Warre, The English Church in the Nineteenth Century, pt. II (London, 1910), pp. 217–8.Google Scholar

⁸ Bowen, Desmond, The Idea of the Victorian Church (Montreal, 1968), p. 166. See note 15.Google Scholar

⁹ Chadwick, Owen, The Victorian Church, pt. II (London, 1970), p. 75.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Memoirs of Archbishop Temple, ed. Sandford, E. G. (London, 1906), I, 223.Google Scholar It is to this quotation that Professor Chadwick refers (Victorian Church, pt. II, p. 75 n. I).

¹¹ Memoirs of Archbishop Temple, I, 221.Google Scholar Dr Percival based his reconstruction on some notes that he jotted down “shortly afterwards” (ibid. p. 225) and on his memory. Dr Percival was not sure when Temple spoke to the Rugby masters. (Ibid. p. 223).

¹² Memoirs of Archbishop Temple, II, 605.Google Scholar

¹³ Ibid.

¹⁴ Memoirs of Archbishop Temple, I, 220 n. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Abbott, Evelyn and Campbell, Lewis, The Life and Letters of Benjamin Jowett (London, 1897), I, p. 275.Google Scholar This is the same letter to which Warre Cornish and Desmond Bowen referred when they wrote of Jowett's hatred of conservative ecclesiastical “terrorism”.

¹⁶ For other and less detailed accounts see Willey, Basil, More Nineteenth Century Studies (London, 1956);Google ScholarCockshut, A. O. J., Anglican Attitudes (London, 1959).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Faber, Geoffrey, Jowett, A Portrait with Background (London, 1958), p. 234.Google Scholar On the subject of Essays and Reviews, Faber portrays Jowett as a naive victim of his more radical colleagues. This interpretation is arguable. Some of Jowett's contemporaries saw him in a different light. Mallock, W. H., author of The New Republic, wrote that there lurked in Jowett ‘a mordant and petu- lant animus against the Christian religion as a whole’. Mallock, W. H., Memoirs of Life and Letters (London, 1920), p. 60.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Crowther, M. A., Church Embattled: Religious Controversy in Mid-Victorian England (London, 1970), p. 117.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Revd. Kennard, R. B., ‘Essay and Reviews’, their Origin, History, General Character and Significance, Persecution, Prosecution, The Judgment of the Arches Court - Review of Judgment (London, 1863), p. 16.Google Scholar Robert Bruce Kennard (1824–95) was Rector of Marnhull in Dorset. He was educated at St John's College, Oxford, while H. B. Wilson was tutor there. Wilson was an object of admiration to him, and was referred to as ‘one of our profoundest living divines’ [p. 79]. Kennard rarely ventured into print, and was better known as a breeder of Shorthorns than as an author. As it will appear later, the ‘leading members of the Critical School’ to whom Kennard refers are Pattison, Wilson and Rowland Williams.

²⁰ Sandford, E. G., Memoirs of Archbishop Temple (London, 1906), II, 604.Google Scholar

²¹ Crowther, M. A., Church Embattled, p. 117, mistakes this publisher for James Parker, the Oxford publisher.Google Scholar

²² A date after 1850 for the move to London is given in the D.N.B. under the entry for Parker. It would seem likely, however, that Parker moved to London before this. Martin, R. B., The Dust of Combat, A Life of Charles Kingsley (London, 1959), p. 72, gives Parker an address on West Strand in 1847.Google Scholar

²³ National Library of Scotland, letter from Alexander Bain to J. S. Mill, 14 Mar. 1859. The book referred to is vol. I of Buckle's, H. T.History of Civilisation. Parker, of course, is most famous for publishing all the early works of John Stuart Mill.Google Scholar

²⁴ Kennard, R. B., Essays and Reviews, Their Origin, p. 155 n.Google Scholar

²⁵ Ibid. p. 17. No study has been done of these two series, but it would seem that some of their contributors held religious beliefs which were unusually radical for Oxford and Cambridge. James Fitzjames Stephen, later to make his legal reputation by unsuccessfully defending Rowland Williams, found Jowett's theological opinions in 1855 far more orthodox than his own. (Stephen, Leslie, The Life of Sir fames Fitzjames Stephen (London, 1895), pp. 184–5.)Google Scholar Charles Goodwin, usually known as the only lay contributor to Essays and Reviews, became an ‘agnostic’ while he was a con- tributor to Cambridge Essays. Goodwin gave up his Fellowship at Catharine Hall, Cambridge, rather than take orders. (Espinasse, Francis, Literary Recollections and Sketches (London, 1893), p. 385.) In this Goodwin showed more delicacy of conscience and soul-searching than his more prominent contemporaries such as Mark Pattison, Leslie Stephen and J. A. Froude. It should also be pointed out that the ‘Oxford Essays advertising sheet’ which was prefixed to the Oxford Essays in their unbound state, carried advertisements for The Westminster Review and radical theological books published by John Chapman.Google Scholar

²⁶ For a somewhat hostile view of Chapman's abilities and character see the various works by Gordon S. Haight.

²⁷ Bodleian MSS Pattison 50, ff. 301–2. Most of the Pattison manuscripts referred to in this article are not indexed in the Bodleian manuscript card catalogue. This is perhaps the reason they have been neglected.

²⁸ Ibid.

²⁹ Bodleian MSS Pattison 50, f, 304.

³⁰ Bodleian MSS Pattison 50, f. 402.

³¹ Bodleian MSS Pattison 50, f. 403.

³² Green, V. H. H., Oxford Common Room, A Study of Lincoln College and Mark Pattison (London, 1957), p. 161.Google Scholar

³³ Pattison, Mark, Memoirs (London, 1885), pp. 309–10.Google Scholar

³⁴ Bodleian MSS Pattison 50, f. 430, 16 Dec. 1854.

³⁵ Green, , Oxford Common Room, p. 194. This accusation was a grave one, since Francis Newman was the most radical of all the religious writers published by Chapman. His form of theism, as expressed in The Soul (1849) and Phases of Faith (1850), was considered the most dangerous form of religious opinion - even worse than that of J. A. Froude. At this period, Newman was the chief luminary of Chapman's literary salon.Google Scholar

³⁶ Bodleian MSS Pattison 51, ff. 386–90, 9 Oct. 1857.

³⁷ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 85–6.

³⁸ Great Staughton belonged to St John's College, Oxford.

³⁹ Kennard, R. B., ‘Essays and Reviews’ Their Origin, p. 82.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ This article was written by Francis Newman, and pretended to be a review of Bunsen. In fact, it was an attack on Christianity of the kind made by Charles C. Hennell, D. F. Strauss and W. R. Greg. It also freely criticized the liberal Theological School of Arnold, Julius Hare and Jowett, of which Wilson was a member. Wilson particularly objected to the attack on Unitarians which suggested that they might as well be Buddhists. It would have been well for Chapman's shaky finances had he taken Wilson's advice and omitted Newman's radical article. In July 1858, Chapman wrote to Pattison that ‘The article on the Religious Weakness of Protestantism has caused the Review to be expelled from so many reading societies and literary institutions and has roused so much antagonism that the sale has sensibly lessened’. (Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, f. 133.)

⁴¹ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 85–6, 5 Jan. 1858. Also see Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 95–7.

⁴² Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 85–6.

⁴³ Bodleian MSS Pattison 51, ff. 386–90, 9 Oct. 1857.

⁴⁴ In 1854, James Martineau and his friends - who were some of Chapman's many creditors - attempted to gain control of the Westminster Review, and turn it into an organ for promoting Martineau's brand of Unitarian theology. In his “frank” letter Pattison made the mistake of praising James Martineau's contributions. (Bodleian MSS Pattison 51, ff. 386–90.)

⁴⁵ This article, which was obviously a sequel to Pattison's W.R. article for January 1857, “The Present State of Religion in Germany”, was never published in the Westminster Review. This article was undoubtedly Pattison's contribution to Essays and Reviews under the new title “Tendencies of Religious Thought in England”. For the transformation of the title see note 56.

⁴⁶ Bodleian MSS Pattison 51, ff. 386–90.

⁴⁷ Bodleian MSS Pattison 51, ff. 396–8, 16 Oct. 1857.

⁴⁸ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 28–9, and MSS Pattison 52, ff. 67–8.

⁴⁹ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, ff. 95–7.

⁵⁰ Ibid.

⁵¹ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, 19 Jan. 1858. The “Mr Sanders” referred to is possibly T. C. Sandars, one time Fellow of Oriel, and a contributor to Oxford Essays, edited by Wilson and published by Parker.

⁵² Ibid.

⁵³ Ibid.

⁵⁴ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, f. 133, and MSS Pattison 52, f. 204.

⁵⁵ Bodleian MSS Pattison 52, 5. 422–3, and MSS Pattison 52, ff. 534–4.

⁵⁶ Bodleian MSS Pattison 53, f. 1412, 2 Apr. 1860. The eventual tide was “The Tendencies of Religious Thought in England, 1688–1750”. The dates 1688–1750 which were attached to the tide of the published version would seem to indicate that Pattison was not dealing with the present state of theology. However, part of the emphasis of his argument was based on his belief that nineteenth-century High Church theology was decrepit because it was eighteenth-century theology. (Essays and Reviews, p. 255.) Pattison did not always restrict his remarks to the High Church. ‘In the present day, when a godless orthodoxy threatens, as in the 15th century, to extinguish religious thought altogether, and nothing is allowed in the Church of England but the formulae of past thinkings, which have long lost all sense of any kind …’ (Essays and Reviews, p. 297).Google Scholar Pattison also offered extensive comments on Anglican theology of the period 1750–1830 and on Methodism and Evangelicalism. (Essays and Reviews, pp. 262, 276, 277, 318 and 328.)Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Ibid.

⁵⁸ Bodleian MSS Pattison 53, ff. 244–5, 23 July 1860.

⁵⁹ Life and Letters of Dean Stanley, II, 30; Life and Letters of Rowland Williams, II, 19.

⁶⁰ Harrison, Frederic, The Creed of a Layman (London, 1907), p. 28.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Ibid. p. 29. This account was taken from a private diary Harrison kept at this time.

⁶² Ibid. p. 30.

⁶³ Green, V. H. H., Oxford Common Room, A Study of Lincoln College and Mark Pattison (London, 1957), p. 224.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid. p. 225.

⁶⁵ Abbott, Evelyn and Campbell, Lewis, Letters of Benjamin Jowett (London, 1899), p. 15.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Prest, J. M., Robert Scott and Benjamin Jowett, A Supplement to the Balliol College Record, 1966, p. 5.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Tollemache, Lionel A., Benjamin Jowett (London, no date [1895?]), p. 13.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Bodleian MSS Pattison 53, ff. 296–7. The article was published in the Oct. 1860 issue of the Westminster Review. Pattison did not know who was the author of the article (Bodleian MSS Pattison 53, ff. 405–6), he gused ir was Harriet Martineau. Harrison referred to the Oxford man as a ‘tutor’, a position which Pattison did not hold in 1858. However, during Harrison's six years at Oxford (1849–55), Pattison was one of the best known tutors in the university.

⁶⁹ Sparrow, John, Mark Pattison and the Idea of a University (Cambridge, 1967), pp. 108–10.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Life and Letters of Dean Stanley, II, 32.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Ibid. II, 37.

⁷² Morley, John, Critical Miscellanies (London, 1886), III, 140.Google Scholar

⁷³ Ibid. III, 173.

⁷⁴ Hon. Tollemache, Lionel A., Old and Odd Memories (London, 1908), p. 168.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Hon. Tollemache, Lionel A., Recollections of Pattison (London, Private Circulation, 1885), p. 77.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Pattison introduced his contribution to Essays and Reviews with the comment that the English have not yet learnt to apply the law of thought and of the succession of opinion to the course of English theology (Essays and Reviews, p. 255).Google Scholar This statement takes on added significance when it is considered in conjunction with Pattison's later condemnation of advocacy in theology. (Essays and Reviews, p. 301.Google Scholar) The idea that Pattison's interest in theology was purely intellectual can be confirmed by the curious conclusion to his essay in which he offers a minimal rationale for the serious study of all aspects of modern theology. The student, Pattison wrote, ‘would find that he had undertaken a perplexing but not altogether profitless inquiry’. (Essays and Reviews, p. 329.)Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Pattison, , Memoirs, p. 210.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ See Pattison's essays from this period in the selection reprinted by Nettleship, Henry, Essays by the Late Mark Pattison (Oxford, 1889), especially II, 177–209 and 396–431.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Hon. Tollemache, Lionel A., Recollections of Pattison, p. 75.Google Scholar