"Science and Culture" and "Literature and Science"

1. In his opening paragraph, Huxley says that the advocates of scientific education have been "excommunicated by the classical scholars, in their capacity of Levites in charge of the ark of culture and monopolists of liberal education." Why would Huxley associate his opponents, even in this playful way, with priests and monopolists?
2. What is Huxley's position on a classical education? What does he think is the problem with it? Does he advocate doing away with it entirely? What is his position on a scientific education? Whom does he think should receive one? Does he think literature has any place in a scientific education?
3. Huxley's essay--and Huxley himself--exemplifies his argument that a scientific education can confer culture just as well as a classical one. But Huxley also turns humanism and the Renaissance spirit against Arnold's position. How so?
4. How does Arnold respond to Huxley's characterization of a classical education?
5. What is Arnold's position on a scientific education? What does he think is the problem with it? Whom does he think should receive one? Does he think science has any place in a classical education?
6. Arnold argues that he'd rather a young person not know the diameter of the moon than be unable to construe a line from Shakespeare. What is the relationship between these examples and his conception of a scientific and classical education, respectively?
7. Do Huxley and Arnold ultimately adopt similar positions, or is there a serious disagreement between them? Do you find one's argument more convincing than the other's?