While studies of the Reformation on the Continent have long emphasized the importance and the influence of the middle class, the dominating figures in many accounts of this movement in Scotland have been the nobles and the preachers. The Lords of the Congregation, along with such ministers as Knox, Wynram, and Harlaw have usually received most of the credit—or blame, depending upon one's point of view—for what took place. While this may be accepted as natural, yet it must be remembered that the Scottish Reformation was neither Lutheran nor Anglican in its final form, but thoroughly Calvinistic. Although Calvinism was not the original moving force, by 1560 it was dominant. By analogy with the parallel movements on the Continent, it is hard to believe that such a development could have come from a purely feudal or princely origin. Following the example of the Reformation in Holland, for example, we are obliged to realize that another important factor was involved: the middle class. Neither the nobles nor the preachers give a complete answer to questions regarding the reason for, and the form of, the Scottish reform movement. True, they held an exceedingly important place in its history. Without the nobles the Reformation might never have taken place. Yet when all this is said, it would seem that if we are to have a proper understanding of the Scottish religious movement it is necessary to study the place held in it by the merchants and master craftsmen. These were the men who in no small way made the Reformation in Scotland possible, and enabled it for the next three hundred years to wield such an enormous influence on the life of the people.

Although nothing approaching the number of words written by Benjamin Hoadly during the eighty-five years of life has been written about him in the 185 years since his death—still, the contentious Bishop has been by no means neglected by historians of eighteenth century England. Hoadly's peculiar position with respect to the Established Church has been dissected out of the complicated anatomy of the Bangorian controversy. His major political treatises have been screened to reveal original contributions to political theory—with largely negative results. His remarkable and rapid climb up the ladder of preferment after the accession of George I, when the Whigs once more prevailed in ministerial and parlimentary positions, has been generally interpreted as payment for substantial services rendered. However, so far as the writer is aware, the preliminary establishment of Benjamin Hoadly's right to Whig patronage has not received detailed consideration.