All is good as it comes from the hand of the Creator; all degenerates under the hands of man. He forces one country to produce the fruits of another, one tree to bear that of another. He confounds climates, elements, and seasons; he mutilates his dog, his horse, his slave; turns everything topsy-turvy, disfigures everything. He will have nothing as nature made it, not even man himself; he must be trained like a managed horse, trimmed like a tree in a garden.

His book, published in 1762, in no sense outlined a workable system of education. Instead, in charming literary style, with much sophistry, many paradoxes, numerous irrelevant digressions upon topics having no relation to education, and in no systematic order, Rousseau presented his ideas as to the nature and purpose of education. Emphasizing the importance of the natural development of the child (R. 264 a), he contended that the three great teachers of man were nature, man, and experience, and that the second and third tended to destroy the value of the first (R. 264 b); that the child should be handled in a new way, and that the most important item in his training up to twelve years of age was to do nothing (R. 264 c, d) so that nature might develop his character properly (R. 264 e); and that from twelve to fifteen his education should be largely from things and nature, and not from books (R. 264 f). As the outcome of such an education Rousseau produced a boy who, from his point of view, would at eighteen still be natural (R. 264 g) and unspoiled by the social life about him, which, after all, he felt was soon to pass away (R. 264 i). The old religious instruction he would completely supersede (R. 264 h).



So depraved was the age, and so wretched were the educational practices of his time, that, in spite of the malevolent impulse which was his driving force, what he wrote actually contained many excellent ideas, pointed the way to better practices, and became an inspiration for others who, unlike Rousseau, were deeply interested in problems of education and child welfare. One cannot study Rousseau's writings as a whole, see him in his eighteenth-century setting, know of his personal life, and not feel that the far-reaching reforms produced by his Emile are among the strangest facts in history.

THE VALUABLE ELEMENTS IN ROUSSEAU'S WORK. Amid his glittering generalities and striking paradoxes Rousseau did, however, set forth certain important ideas as to the proper education of children. Popularizing the best ideas of the Englishman, Locke (p. 433), Rousseau may be said to have given currency to certain conceptions as to the education of children which, in the hands of others, brought about great educational changes. Briefly stated, these were:

1. The replacement of authority by reason and investigation.

2. That education should be adapted to the gradually unfolding capacities of the child.

3. That each age in the life of a child has activities which are normal to that age, and that education should seek for and follow these.

4. That physical activity and health are of first importance.

5. That education, and especially elementary education, should take place through the senses, rather than through the memory.

6. That the emphasis placed on the memory in education is fundamentally wrong, dwarfing the judgment and reason of the child.

7. That catechetical and Jesuitical types of education should be abandoned.

8. That the study of theological subtleties is unsuited to child needs or child capacity.

9. That the natural interests, curiosity, and activities of children should be utilized in their education.

10. That the normal activities of children call for expression, and that the best means of utilizing these activities are conversation, writing, drawing, music, and play.

11. That education should no longer be exclusively literary and linguistic, but should be based on sense perception, expression, and reasoning.

12. That such education calls for instruction in the book of nature, with home geography and the investigation of elementary problems in science occupying a prominent place.

13. That the child be taught rather than the subject-matter; life here rather than hereafter; and the development of reason rather than the loading of the memory, were the proper objects of education.

14. That a many-sided education is necessary to reveal child possibilities; to correct the narrowing effect of specialized class education; and to prepare one for possible changes in fortune.

A new educational ideal presented. Rousseau's Emile presented a new ideal in education. According to his conception it was debasing that man should be educated to behave correctly in an artificial society, to follow blindly the doctrines of a faith, or to be an obedient subject of a king. Instead he conceived the function of education to be to evolve the natural powers, cultivate the human side, unfold the inborn capacities of every human being, and to develop a reasoning individual, capable of intelligently directing his life under diverse conditions and in any form of society. A book setting forth such ideas naturally was revolutionary [1] in matters of education. It deeply influenced thinkers along these lines during the remaining years of the eighteenth century, and became the inspiring source of nineteenth-century reforms. As Rousseau's Social Contract became the political handbook of the French Revolutionists, so his Emile became the inspiration of a new theory as to the education of children.

Coming, as it did, at a time when political and ecclesiastical despotisms were fast breaking down in France, when new forces were striving for expression throughout Europe, and when new theories as to the functions of government were being set forth in the American Colonies and in France, it gave the needed inspiration for the evolution of a new theory of non- religious, universal, and democratic education which would prepare citizens for intelligent participation in the functions of a democratic State, and for a reorganization of the subject-matter of education itself. A new theory as to the educational purpose was soon to arise, and the whole nature of the educational process, in the hands of others, was soon to be transformed as a result of the fortunate conjunction of the iconoclastic and impractical discussion of education by Rousseau and the more practical work of English, French, and American political theorists and statesmen. Out of the fusing of these, modern educational theory arose.

II. GERMAN ATTEMPTS TO WORK OUT A NEW THEORY

INFLUENCE OF THE EMILE IN GERMAN LANDS. The Emile was widely read, not only in France, but throughout the continent of Europe as well. In German lands its publication coincided with the rising tide of nationalism—the "Period of Enlightenment"—and the book was warmly welcomed by such (then young) men as Goethe, Schiller, Herder, Richter, Fichte, and Kant. It presented a new ideal of education and a new ideal for humanity, and its ideas harmonized well with those of the newly created aristocracy of worth which the young German enthusiasts were busily engaged in proclaiming for their native land. The ideal of the perfected individual, strong in the consciousness of his powers, now found expression in the new "classics of individualism" which marked the outburst of the best that German literature has ever produced. As Paulsen [2] well says:

Rousseau exercised an immense influence on his times, and Germany was stirred perhaps even more deeply than France. In France Voltaire continued to be regarded as the great man of his time, whereas, in Germany, his place in the esteem of the younger generation had been taken by the enthusiast of Geneva. Kant, Herder, Goethe, Schiller, Fichte, all of them were roused by Rousseau to the inmost depths of their natures. He gave utterance to the passionate longing of their souls: to do away with the imitation of French courtly culture, by which Nature was suppressed and perverted in every way, to do away with the established political and social order, based on court society and class distinctions, which was felt to be lowering to man in his quality as a reasonable being, and to return to Nature, to simple and unsophisticated habits of life, or rather to find a way through Nature to a better civilisation, which would restore the natural values of life to their rightful place and would be compatible with truth and virtue, sincerity and probity of character.

The great German philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), was so deeply stirred by the Emile that the regularity of his daily walks and the clearness of his thinking were disturbed by it. Goethe called the book "the teacher's Gospel." Schiller praised Rousseau as "a new Socrates, who of Christians wished to make men." Herder acclaimed Rousseau as a German, and his "divine work" as his guide. Jean-Paul Richter confessed himself indebted to Rousseau for the best ideas in his Levana. Lavater declared himself ready for a Reformation in education along the lines laid down by Rousseau.



BASEDOW AND HIS WORK. Perhaps the most important practical influence exerted by the Emile in German lands came in the work of Johann Bernard Basedow and his followers. Basedow was a North German who had been educated in the Gymnasium at Hamburg, had studied in the theological faculty at Leipzig, had been a tutor in a nobleman's family, and had been a teacher in a Ritterakademie in Denmark and the Gymnasium at Altona. Deeply imbued with the new scientific spirit, in thorough revolt against the dominance of the Church in human lives, and incited to new efforts by his reading of the Emile, Basedow thought out a plan for a reform school which should put many of Rousseau's ideas into practice. In 1768 he issued his Address to Philanthropists and Men of Property on Schools and Studies and their Influence on the Public Weal, in which he appealed for funds to enable him to open a school to try out his ideas, and to enable him to prepare a new type of textbooks for the use of schools. He proposed in this appeal to organize a school which should be non-sectarian, and also advocated the creation of a National Council of Education to have charge of all public instruction. These were essentially the ideas of the French political reformers of the time. The appeal was widely scattered, awakened much enthusiasm, and subscriptions to assist him poured in from many sources. [3]

In 1774 Basedow published two works of more than ordinary importance. The first, a Book of Method for Fathers and Mothers of Families and of Nations, was a book for adults, and outlined a plan of education for both boys and girls. The keynotes were "following nature," "impartial religious instruction," children to be dealt with as children, learning through the senses, language instruction by a natural method, and much study of natural objects. The ideas were a combination of those of Bacon, Comenius, and Rousseau. The second book, in four volumes, and containing one hundred copper-plate illustrations, was the famous Elementary Work (Elementarwerk mit Kupfern) (R. 266), the first illustrated school textbook since the Orbis Pictus (1654) of Comenius. This work of Basedow's became, in German lands, the Orbis Pictus of the eighteenth century. By means of its "natural methods" (R. 265) children were to be taught to read, both the vernacular and Latin, more easily and in less time than had been done before, and in addition were to be given a knowledge of morals, commerce, scientific subjects, and social usages by "an incomparable method," founded on experience in teaching children. The book enjoyed a wide circulation among the middle and upper classes in German lands.

BASEDOW'S PHILANTHROPINUM. In 1774 Prince Leopold, of Dessau, a town in the duchy of Anhalt, in northern Germany, gave Basedow the use of two buildings and a garden, and twelve thousand thalers in money, with which to establish his long-heralded Philanthropinum, which was to be an educational institution of a new type. Great expectations were aroused, and a widespread interest in the new school awakened. Education according to nature, with a reformed, time-saving, natural method for the teaching of languages, were to be its central ideas. Children were to be treated as children, and not as adults. Powdered hair, gilded coats, swords, rouge, and hoops were to be discarded for short hair, clean faces, sailor jackets, and caps, while the natural plays of children and directed physical training were to be made a feature of the instruction. The languages were to be taught by conversational methods. Each child was to be taught a handicraft—turning, planing, and carpentering were provided— for both social and educational reasons. Instruction in real things— science, nature—was to take the place of instruction in words, and the vernacular was to be the language of instruction. The institution was to have the atmosphere of religion, but was not to be Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, or Jewish, and was to be free from "theologizing distinctions." Latin, German, French, mathematics, a knowledge of nature (geography, physics, natural history), music, dancing, drawing, and physical training were the principal subjects of instruction. The children were divided into four classes, and the instruction for each, with the textbooks to be used, was outlined (R. 265).

The school opened with Basedow and three assistants as teachers, and two of Basedow's children and twelve others as pupils. Later the school came to have many boarding pupils, drawn from as far-distant points as Riga and Spain. In 1776 a public examination was held, to which many distinguished men were invited, and the work which Basedow's methods could produce was exhibited. These methods seem to have been successful, judging from the rather full accounts which have been left us. [4] The school represented a new type of educational effort, and was frankly experimental in purpose. It was an attempt to apply, in practice, the main ideas of Rousseau's Emile. Basedow tried the plan of education outlined by Rousseau with his own daughter, whom he named Emilie.



As a promising experiment the school awakened widespread interest, and Basedow was supported by such thinkers of the time as Goethe and Kant. The year following the "Examination" Kant, then professor of philosophy at the University of Koenigsberg, contributed an article to the Koenigsberg Gazette explaining the importance of the experiment Basedow was making. Still later, in his university lectures On Pedagogy, he further stated the importance of such a new experiment, in the following words:

It was imagined that experiments in education were not necessary; and that, whether any thing in it was good or bad, could be judged of by the reason. But this was a great mistake; experience shows very often that results are produced precisely the opposite to those which had been expected. We also see from experiment that one generation cannot work out a complete plan of education. The only experimental school which has made a beginning toward breaking the path was the Dessau institution. This praise must be given to it, in spite of the many faults which may be charged against it; faults which belong to all conclusions based upon such undertakings; and which make new experiments always necessary. It was the only school in which the teachers had the liberty to work after their own methods and plans, and where they stood in connection, not only with each other, but with men of learning throughout all Germany.

BASEDOW'S INFLUENCE, AND FOLLOWERS. Basedow, though, was an impractical theorist, boastful and quarrelsome, vulgar and coarse, given to drunkenness and intemperate speech, and fond of making claims for his work which the results did not justify. In a few years he had been displaced as director, and in 1793 the Philanthropinum closed its doors. The school, nevertheless, was a very important educational experiment, and Basedow's work for a time exerted a profound influence on German pedagogical thought. He may be said to have raised instruction in the Realien in German lands to a place of distinct importance, and to have given a turn to such instruction which it has ever since retained. [5] The methods of instruction, too, worked out in arithmetic, geography, geometry, natural history, physics, and history were in many ways as revolutionary as those evolved by Pestalozzi later on in Switzerland. In his emphasis on scientific subject-matter Basedow surpassed Pestalozzi, but Pestalozzi possessed a clearer, intuitive insight into the nature and purpose of the educational process. The work of the two men furnishes an interesting basis for comparison (R. 271), and the work of each gave added importance to that of the other.

From Dessau an interest in pedagogical ideas and experiments spread over Europe, and particularly over German lands. Other institutions, modeled after the Philanthropinum, were founded in many places, and some of Basedow's followers [6] did as important work along certain lines as did Basedow himself. His followers were numerous, and of all degrees of worth. They urged acceptance of the new ideas of Rousseau as worked out and promulgated by Basedow; vigorously attacked the old schools, making converts here and there; and in a way helped to prepare northern German lands for the incoming, later, of the better-organized ideas of the German-Swiss reformer Pestalozzi, to whose work we next turn.

III. THE WORK AND INFLUENCE OF PESTALOZZI

THE INSPIRATION OF PESTALOZZI. Among those most deeply influenced by Rousseau's Emile was a young German-Swiss by the name of Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, who was born (1746) and brought up in the ancient city of Zurich. Inspired by Rousseau's writings he spent the early part of his life in trying to render service to the poor, and the latter part in working out for himself a theory and a method of instruction based on the natural development of the child. To Pestalozzi, more than to any one else, we owe the foundations of the modern secular vernacular elementary school, and in consequence his work is of commanding importance in the history of the development of educational practice.

Trying to educate his own child according to Rousseau's plan, he not only discovered its impracticability but also that the only way to improve on it was to study the children themselves. Accordingly he opened a school and home on his farm at Neuhof, in 1774. Here he took in fifty abandoned children, to whom he taught reading, writing, and arithmetic, gave them moral discourses, and trained them in gardening, farming, and cheese- making. It was an attempt to regenerate beggars by means of education, which Pestalozzi firmly believed could be done. At the end of two years he had spent all the money he and his wife possessed, and the school closed in failure—a blessing in disguise—though with Pestalozzi's faith in the power of education unshaken. Of this experiment he wrote: "For years I have lived in the midst of fifty little beggars, sharing in my poverty my bread with them, living like a beggar myself in order to teach beggars to live like men."

Turning next to writing, while continuing to farm, Pestalozzi now tried to express his faith in education in printed form. His Leonard and Gertrude (1781) was a wonderfully beautiful story of Swiss peasant life, and of the genius and sympathy and love of a woman amid degrading surroundings. From a wretched place the village of Bonnal, under Pestalozzi's pen, was transformed by the power of education. [7] The book was a great success from the first, and for it Pestalozzi was made a "citizen" of the French Republic, along with Washington, Madison, Kosciusko, Wilberforce, and Tom Paine. He continued to farm and to think, though nearly starving, until 1798, when the opportunity for which he was really fitted came.

PESTALOZZI'S EDUCATIONAL EXPERIMENTS. In 1798 "The Helvetic Republic" was proclaimed, an event which divided Pestalozzi's life into two parts. Up to this time he had been interested wholly in the philanthropic aspect of education, believing that the poor could be regenerated through education and labor. From this time on he interested himself in the teaching aspect of the problem, in the working-out and formulation of a teaching method based on the natural development of the child, and in training others to teach. Much to the disgust of the authorities of the new Swiss Government, citizen Pestalozzi applied for service as a schoolteacher. The opportunity to render such service soon came.

That autumn the French troops invaded Switzerland, and, in putting down the stubborn resistance of the three German cantons, shot down a large number of the people. Orphans to the number of 169 were left in the little town of Stanz, and citizen Pestalozzi was given charge of them. For six months he was father, mother, teacher, and nurse. Then, worn out himself, the orphanage was changed into a hospital. A little later he became a schoolmaster in Burgdorf; was dismissed; became a teacher in another school; and finally, in 1800, opened a school himself in an old castle there. He now drew about him other teachers interested in improving instruction, and in consequence could specialize the work. He provided separate teachers for drawing and singing, geography and history, language and arithmetic, and gymnastics. The year following the school was enlarged into a teachers' training-school, the government extending him aid in return for giving Swiss teachers one month of training as teachers in his school. Here he wrote and published How Gertrude teaches her Children, which explained his methods and forms his most important pedagogical work (R. 267); a Guide for teaching Spelling and Reading; and a Book for Mothers, devoted to a description of "object teaching." In 1803, the castle being needed by the government, Pestalozzi moved first to Munchenbuchsee, near Hofwyl, opening his Institute temporarily in an old convent there. For a few months, in 1804, he was associated with Emanuel von Fellenberg, at Hofwyl (p. 546), but in October, 1804, he moved to Yverdon, where he reestablished the Institute, and where the next twenty years of his life were spent and his greatest success achieved.



THE CONTRIBUTION OF PESTALOZZI. The great contribution of Pestalozzi lay in that, following the lead of Rousseau, he rejected the religious aim and the teaching of mere words and facts, which had characterized all elementary education up to near the close of the eighteenth century, and tried instead to reduce the educational process to a well-organized routine, based on the natural and orderly development of the instincts, capacities, and powers of the growing child. Taking Rousseau's idea of a return to nature, he tried to apply it to the education of children. This led to his rejection of what he called the "empty chattering of mere words" and "outward show" in the instruction in reading and the catechism, and the introduction in their place of real studies, based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning. "Sense impression" became his watchword. [8] As he expressed it, he "tried to organize and psychologize the educational process" by harmonizing it with the natural development of the child (R. 267). To this end he carefully studied children, and developed his methods experimentally as a result of his observation. To this end, both at Burgdorf and Yverdon, all results of preceding teachers and writers on education were rejected, for fear that error might creep in. Read nothing, discover everything, and prove all things, came to be the working guides of himself and his teachers.

The development of man he believed to be organic, and to proceed according to law. It was the work of the teacher to discover these laws of development and to assist nature in securing "a natural, symmetrical, and harmonious development" of all the "faculties" of the child. Real education must develop the child as a whole—mentally, physically, morally—and called for the training of the head and the hand and the heart. The only proper means for developing the powers of the child was use, and hence education must guide and stimulate self-activity, be based on intuition and exercise, and the sense impressions must be organized and directed. Education, too, if it is to follow the organic development of the child, must observe the proper progress of child development and be graded, so that each step of the process shall grow out of the preceding and grow into the following stage. To accomplish these ends the training must be all-round and harmonious; much liberty must be allowed the child in learning; education must proceed largely by doing instead of by words, the method of learning must be largely analytical; real objects and ideas must precede symbols and words; and, finally, the organization and correlation of what is learned must be looked after by the teacher.



Still more, Pestalozzi possessed a deep and abiding faith, new at the time, in the power of education as a means of regenerating society. He had begun his work by trying to "teach beggars to live like men," and his belief in the potency of education in working this transformation, so touchingly expressed in his Leonard and Gertrude, never left him. He believed that each human being could be raised through the influence of education to the level of an intellectually free and morally independent life, and that every human being was entitled to the right to attain such freedom and independence. The way to this lay through the full use of his developing powers, under the guidance of a teacher, and not through a process of repeating words and learning by heart. Not only the intellectual qualities of perception, judgment, and reasoning need exercise, but the moral powers as well. To provide such exercise and direction was the work of the school.

Pestalozzi also resented the brutal discipline which for ages had characterized all school instruction, believed it by its very nature immoral, and tried to substitute for this a strict but loving discipline— a "thinking love," he calls it—and to make the school as nearly as possible like a gentle and refined home. To a Swiss father, who on visiting his school exclaimed, "Why, this is not a school, but a family," Pestalozzi answered that such a statement was the greatest praise he could have given him.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE IDEAS. The educational consequences of these new ideas were very large. They in time gave aim and purpose to the elementary school of the nineteenth century, transforming it from an instrument of the Church for church ends, to an instrument of society to be used for its own regeneration and the advancement of the welfare of all. [9] The introduction of the study of natural objects in place of words, and much talking about what was seen and studied instead of parrot-like reproductions of the words of a book, revolutionized both the methods and the subject-matter of instruction in the developing elementary school. Observation and investigation tended to supersede mere memorizing; class discussion and thinking to supersede the reciting of the words of the book; thinking about what was being done to supersede routine learning; and class instruction to supersede the wasteful individual teaching which had for so long characterized all school work. It meant the reorganization of the work of the vernacular school on a modern basis, with class organization and group instruction, and a modern-world purpose (R. 269).

The work of Pestalozzi also meant the introduction of new subject-matter for instruction, the organization of new teaching subjects for the elementary school, and the redirection of the elementary education of children. Observation led to the development of elementary-science study, and the study of home geography; talking about what was observed led to the study of language usage, as distinct from the older study of grammar; and counting and measuring led to the study of number, and hence to a new type of primary arithmetic. The reading of the school also changed both in character and purpose. In other words, in place of an elementary education based on reading, a little writing and spelling, and the catechism, all of a memoriter type and with religious ends in view, a new primary school, essentially secular in character, was created by the work of Pestalozzi. This new school was based on the study of real objects, learning through sense impressions, the individual expression of ideas, child activity, and the development of the child's powers in an orderly way. In fact, "the development of the faculties" of the child became a by-word with Pestalozzi and his followers.

Pestalozzi's deep abiding faith in the power of education to regenerate society was highly influential in Switzerland, throughout western Europe, and later in America in showing how to deal with orphans, vagrants, and those suffering from physical defects or in need of reformation, by providing for such a combination of intellectual and industrial training.

THE SPREAD AND INFLUENCE OF PESTALOZZI'S WORK. So famous did the work of Pestalozzi become that his schools at Burgdorf and Yverdon came to be "show places," even in a land filled with natural wonders. Observers and students came from America (R. 268) and from all over Europe to see and to teach in his school, and draw inspiration from seeing his work (R. 270) and talking with him. [10] In particular the educators of Prussia were attracted by his work, and, earlier than other nations, saw the far- reaching significance of his discoveries. Herbart visited his school as early as 1799, when but a young man of twenty-three, and wrote a very sympathetic description of his new methods. Froebel spent the years 1808 to 1810 as a teacher at Yverdon, when he was a young man of twenty-six to eight. "It soon became evident to me," wrote Froebel, "that 'Pestalozzi' was to be the watchword of my life." The philosopher Fichte, whose Addresses (1807-08) on the condition of the German people (page 568), after their humiliating defeat by Napoleon, did much to reveal to Prussia the possibilities of national regeneration by means of education, had taught in Zurich, knew Pestalozzi, and afterward exploited his work and his ideas in Berlin. [11] As early as 1803 an envoy, sent by the Prussian King, [12] reported favorably on Pestalozzi's work, and in 1804 Pestalozzian methods were authorized for the primary schools of Prussia. In 1808 seventeen teachers were sent to Switzerland, at the expense of the Prussian Government, to spend three years in studying Pestalozzi's ideas and methods. On their return, these and others spread Pestalozzian ideas throughout Prussia. A pastor and teacher from Wuertemberg, Karl August Zeller (1774-1847), came to Burgdorf in 1803 to study. In 1806 he opened a training-school for teachers in Zurich, and there worked out a plan of studies based on the work of Pestalozzi. This was printed and attracted much attention. In 1808 the King of Wuertemberg listened to five lectures on Pestalozzian methods by Zeller, and invited him to a position as school inspector in his State. Before he had done but a few months' work he was called to Prussia, to organize a normal school and begin the introduction of Pestalozzian ideas there. From Prussia the ideas and methods of Pestalozzi gradually spread to the other German States.

Many Swiss teachers were trained by Pestalozzi, and these also helped to extend his work and ideas over Switzerland. Particularly in German Switzerland did his ideas take root and reorganize education. As a result modern systems of education made an early start in these cantons. One of Pestalozzi's earliest and most faithful teachers, Hermann Kruesi, became principal of the Swiss normal school at Gais, and trained teachers there in Pestalozzian methods. Zeller's pupils, too, did much to spread his influence among the Swiss. Pestalozzi's ideas were also carried to England, but in no such satisfactory manner as to the German States. Where German lands received both the method and the spirit, the English obtained largely the form. Later Pestalozzian ideas came to the United States, at first largely through English sources, and, after about 1860, resulted in a thoroughgoing reorganization of American elementary education.

After Pestalozzi's institution had become celebrated, and visitors and commissions from many countries had visited him and it, and after governments had vied with one another in introducing Pestalozzian methods and reforms, the vogue of the Pestalozzian ideas became very extended. Many excellent private schools were founded on the Pestalozzian model, while on the other hand self-styled Pestalozzian reformers sprang up on all sides. All this imitation was both natural and helpful; the foolishness and charlatanism in time disappeared, leaving a real advance in the educational conception.

THE MANUAL-LABOR SCHOOL OF FELLENBERG. Of the Swiss associates and followers of Pestalozzi one of the most influential was Phillip Emanuel von Fellenberg (1771-1844). The son of a Swiss official of high political and social position, possessed of wealth, having traveled extensively, Fellenberg, having become convinced that correct early education was the only means whereby the State might be elevated and the lot of man made better, resolved (1805) to devote his life and his fortune to the working- out of his ideas. For a short time associated with Pestalozzi, he soon withdrew and established, on his own estate, an Institution which later (1829) came to comprise the following:

1. A farm of about six hundred acres.

2. Workshops for manufacturing clothing and tools.

3. A printing and lithographing establishment.

4. A literary institution for the education of the well-to-do.

5. A lower or real school, which trained for handicrafts and middle-class occupations.

6. An agricultural school for the education of the poor as farm laborers, and as teachers for the rural schools.



By 1810 the Institution had begun to attract attention, and soon pupils and visitors came from distant lands to study in and to examine the schools. The agricultural school in particular aroused interest. More than one hundred Reports (R. 272) were published, in Europe and America, on this very successful experiment in a combined intellectual and manual- labor type of education. Fellenberg died in 1844, and his family discontinued the school in 1848.

Fellenberg's work was a continuation of the social-regeneration conception of education held by Pestalozzi, and contained the germ-idea of all our agricultural and industrial education. His plan was widely copied in Switzerland, Germany, England, and the United States. It was well suited to the United States because of the very democratic conditions then prevailing among an agricultural people possessed of but little wealth. The plan of combining farming and schooling made for a time a strong appeal to Americans, and such schools were founded in many parts of the country. The idea at first was to unite training in agriculture with schooling, but it was soon extended to the rapidly rising mechanical pursuits as well. The plan, however, was rather short-lived in the United States, due to the rise of manufacturing and the opening of rich and cheap farms to the westward, and lasted with us scarcely two decades. A generation later it reappeared in the Central West in the form of a new demand for colleges to teach agricultural and mechanical arts, but with the manual-labor idea omitted. This we shall refer to again, later on (chapter xxix).



IV. REDIRECTION OF THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS WORK. Though some form of parish school for the elements of religious instruction had existed in many places during the later Middle Ages, and foundations providing for some type of elementary instruction had appeared here and there in almost all lands, the elementary vernacular school, as we have previously pointed out, was nevertheless clearly the outcome of the Protestant movement in the sixteenth century, and in its origin was essentially a child of the Church. A child of the Church, too, for more than two centuries the elementary vernacular school remained. During these two centuries the elementary school made slow but rather unsatisfactory progress, due largely to there being no other motive for its maintenance or expansion than the original religious purpose. Only in the New England Colonies in North America, in some of the provinces of the Netherlands, and in a few of the German States had any real progress been made in evolving any different type of school out of this early religious creation, and even in these places the change was in form of control rather than in subject- matter or purpose. The school remained religious in purpose, even though its control was beginning to pass from the Church to the State.

Now, within half a century, beginning with the work of Rousseau (1762), and by means of the labors of the political philosophers of France, the Revolutionary leaders in the American Colonies, the legislative Assemblies and Conventions in France, and the experimental work of Basedow and his followers in German lands and of Pestalozzi and his disciples in Switzerland, the whole purpose and nature of the elementary vernacular school was changed. The American and French political revolutions and the more peaceful changes in England had ushered in new conceptions as to the nature and purpose and duties of government. As a consequence of these new ideas, education had come to be regarded in a new light, and to assume a new importance in the eyes of statesmen. In place of schools to serve religious and sectarian ends, and maintained as an adjunct of the parishes or of a State Church, the elementary vernacular school now came to be conceived of as an instrument of the State, the chief purpose of which was to serve state ends. Some time would, of course, be required to develop the state support necessary to effect the complete transformation in control, and the forces of reaction would naturally delay the process as much as possible, but the theory of state purpose had at last been so effectively proclaimed, and the forces of a modern world were pushing the idea so steadily forward, that it was only a question of time until the change would be effected.

A NEW IMPETUS FOR CHANGE IN CONTROL. Basedow and Pestalozzi, too, had given the movement for a transfer of control a new impetus by working out new methods in instruction and in organizing new subject-matter for the school, and methods and subject-matter which harmonized with the spirit and principles of the new democracy that had been proclaimed. Pestalozzi in particular had sought, guided by a clearer insight into the educational problem than Basedow possessed (R. 271), to create a school in which children might, under the wise guidance of the teacher, develop and strengthen their own "faculties" and thus evolve into reasoning, self- directing human beings, fitted for usefulness and service in a modern world. To make intelligent and reasoning individuals of all citizens, to develop moral and civic character, to train for life in organized society, and to serve as an instrument by means of which an ignorant, drunken, immoral, and shiftless working-class and peasantry might be elevated into men and women of character, intelligence, and directive power, was in Pestalozzi's conception the underlying meaning of the school. After Pestalozzi, the earlier conception as to the religious purpose of the elementary vernacular schools, by means of which children were to be trained almost exclusively "in the principles of our holy religion" and to become "loyal church members," and to "fit them for that station in life in which it hath pleased their Heavenly Father to place them," was doomed. In its stead there was certain to arise a newer conception of the school as an instrument of that form of organized society known as the State, and maintained by the State to train its future citizens for intelligent participation in the duties and obligations of citizenship, and for social, moral, and economic efficiency.

THE WAY NOW BECOMING CLEAR. After two hundred and fifty years of confusion and political failure, the way was now at last becoming clear for the creation of national instead of church systems of elementary education, and for the firm establishment of the elementary vernacular school as an important obligation to its future citizens of every progressive modern State and the common birthright of all. This became distinctively the work of the nineteenth century. It also became the work of the nineteenth century to gather up the old secondary-school and university foundations, accumulated through the ages, and remould them to meet modern needs, fuse them into the national school systems created, and connect them in some manner with the people's schools. To see how this was done we next turn to the beginnings of the organization of national school systems in the German States, France, Italy, England, and the United States. These may be taken as types. As Prussia was the first modern State to grasp the significance of national education, and to organize state schools, we shall begin our study by first tracing the steps by which this transformation was effected there.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

1. Compare the statement of the valuable elements in the theories of Rousseau (p. 530) with the main ideas of Basedow (p. 535); Ratke (p. 607); Comenius (p. 409).

2. Do we accept all the fourteen points of Rousseau's theory to-day?

3. Might a Rousseau have done work of similar importance in Russia, early in the twentieth century? Why?

4. Explain the educational significance of "self-activity," "sense impressions," and "harmonious development."

5. What were the strong points in the experimental work of Basedow?

6. Explain the great enthusiasm which his rather visionary statements and plans awakened.

7. Show the importance of such work as that of Basedow in preparing the way for better-organized reform work.

8. How far was Pestalozzi right as to the power of education to give men intellectual and moral freedom?

9. What do you understand Pestalozzi to have meant by "the development of the faculties"?

10. State the importance of the work of Pestalozzi from the point of view of showing the world how to deal with orphans and defectives.

11. Show how the germs of agricultural and technical education lay in the work of Fellenberg.

12. Explain the greater popularity of the Emile in German lands.

13. State the change in subject-matter and aims from the vernacular church school to the school as thought out by Pestalozzi.

14. Show that it was a fortunate conjunction that brought the work of Pestalozzi alongside of that of the political reformers of France.

15. What differences might there have been had Comenius lived and done his work in the time of Pestalozzi?

SELECTED READINGS

In the accompanying Book of Readings the following selections, illustrative of the contents of this chapter, are reproduced:

264. Rousseau: Illustrative Selections from the Emile. 265. Basedow: Instruction in the Philanthropinum. 266. Basedow: A Page from the Elementarwerk. 267. Pestalozzi: Explanation of his Work. 268. Griscom: A Visit to Pestalozzi at Yverdon. 269. Woodbridge: An Estimate of Pestalozzi's Work. 270. Dr. Mayo: On Pestalozzi. 271. Woodbridge: Work of Pestalozzi and Basedow compared. 272. Griscom: Hofwyl as seen by an American.

QUESTIONS ON THE READINGS

1. Show the fallacy of Rousseau's reasoning (264 d) as to society being a denominator which prevents man from realizing himself.

2. What are the elements of truth and falsity in Rousseau's idling-to-the- twelfth-year (264 d) idea?

3. Would such a training up to twelve (264 e) be possible, or desirable?

4. What type of education is presupposed in 264 f?

5. Show the similarity in the conceptions of the Orbis Pictus (221) and the Elementarwerk (266).

6. What types of schools and conceptions of education were combined in the Philanthropinum (265)?

7. Just what did Pestalozzi attempt (267) to accomplish?

8. Compare the accounts as to purpose and instruction given by Pestalozzi (267) and Griscom (268).

9. What do the tributes of Woodbridge (269) and Mayo (270) reveal as to the character of Pestalozzi and his influence?

10. Analyze the courses of instruction (272) at Hofwyl.

11. State the points of similarity and difference between the work of Basedow and Pestalozzi (271), and the points of superiority in the work of Pestalozzi.

SELECTED REFERENCES

* Anderson, L. F. "The Manual-Labor-School Movement"; in Educational Review, vol. 46, pp. 369-88. (November, 1913.) Barnard, Henry. Pestalozzi and his Educational System. * Compayre, G. Jean-Jacques Rousseau. * Compayre, G. Pestalozzi and Elementary Education. * Guimps, Roger de. Pestalozzi: his Aim and Work. * Kruesi, Hermann, Jr. Life and Work of Pestalozzi. * Parker S. C. History of Modern Education, chaps. 8, 9, 13-16. * Pestalozzi, J. H. Leonard and Gertrude. Pestalozzi, J. H. How Gertrude teaches her Children. Pinloche, A. Pestalozzi and the Foundations of the Modern Elementary School.



CHAPTER XXII

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION IN PRUSSIA

I. THE BEGINNINGS OF NATIONAL ORGANIZATION

EARLY GERMAN PROGRESS IN SCHOOL ORGANIZATION. The first modern nation to take over the school from the Church, and to make of it an instrument for promoting the interests of the State was Prussia, and the example of Prussia was soon followed by the other German States. The reasons for this early action by the German States will be clear if we remember the marked progress made in establishing state control of the churches (p. 318) which followed the Protestant Revolts in German lands. Figure 96, page 319, reexamined now, will make the reason for the earlier evolution of state education in Germany plain. Wuertemberg, as early as 1559, had organized the first German state-church school system, and had made attendance at the religious instruction, compulsory on the parents of all children. The example of Wuertemberg was followed by Brunswick (1569), Saxony (1580), Weimar (1619), and Gotha (1642). In Weimar and Gotha the compulsory- attendance idea had even been adopted for elementary-school instruction to all children up to the age of twelve.

By the middle of the seventeenth century most of the German States, even including Catholic Bavaria, had followed the example of Wuertemberg, and had created a state-church school system which involved at least elementary and secondary schools and the beginnings of compulsory school attendance. Notwithstanding the ravages of the Thirty Years' War (1618- 48), the state-church schools of German lands contained, more definitely than had been worked out elsewhere, the germs of a separate state school organization. Only in the American Colonies (p. 364) had an equal development in state-church organization and control been made. As state- church schools, with the religious purpose dominant, the German schools remained until near the middle of the eighteenth century. Then a new movement for state control began, and within fifty years thereafter they had been transformed into institutions of the State, with the state purpose their most essential characteristic. How this transformation was effected in Prussia, the leader among the German States, and the forces which brought about the transformation, it will be the purpose of this chapter to relate.

THE NEW UNIVERSITY OF HALLE. The turning-point in the history of German educational progress was the founding of the University of Halle, in 1694. This institution, due to its entirely new methods of work, has usually been designated as the first modern university. A few forward-looking men, men who had been expelled from Leipzig because of their critical attitude and modern ways of thinking, were made professors here. Its creation was due to the sympathy for these men felt by the Elector Friedrich III of Brandenburg, later the first King of Prussia. The King clearly intended that the new institution should be representative of modern tendencies in education. To this end he installed as professors men who could and would reform the instruction in theology, law, medicine, and philosophy.

In consequence Aristotle was displaced for the new scientific philosophy of Descartes and Bacon, and Latin in the classrooms for the German speech. The sincere pietistic faith of Francke (p. 418) was substituted for the Lutheran dogmatism which had supplanted the earlier Catholic. The instruction in law was reformed to accord with the modern needs and theory of the State. Medical instruction, based on observation, experimentation, and deduction, superseded instruction based on the reading of Hippocrates and Galen. The new sciences, especially mathematics and physics, found a congenial home in the philosophical or arts faculty. Free scientific investigation and research, without interference from the theological faculty, were soon established as features of the institution, and in place of the fixed scientific knowledge taught for so long from the texts of Aristotle (Rs. 113-15) and other ancients, a new and changing science, that must prove its laws and axioms, and which might at any time be changed by the investigation of any teacher or student, here now found a home. Under the leadership of Christian Wolff, who was Professor of Philosophy from 1707 to 1723, when he was banished by a new King at the instigation of the Pietists for his too great liberalism in religion, and again from 1740 to 1754, after his recall by Frederick the Great, [1] philosophy was "made to speak German" and the Aristotelian philosophy was permanently displaced. "No thing without sufficient cause" was the ruling principle of Wolff's teaching.

CHANGES WROUGHT IN OLD ESTABLISHED PROCEDURE. The introduction of the new scientific and mathematical and philosophical studies soon changed the arts or philosophy faculty from a preparatory faculty for the faculties of law, medicine, and theology, as it had been for centuries, to the equal of these three professional faculties in importance, while the elementary instruction in Latin and Greek was now relegated to the Gymnasia below. These were now in turn changed into preparatory schools for all four faculties of the university. The university instruction in the ancient languages was now placed on a much higher plane, and a new humanistic renaissance took place (p. 462) which deeply influenced both university and gymnasial training. New standards of taste and judgment were drawn from the ancient literatures and applied to modern life, and students were trained to read and enjoy the ancient classics. This reawakening of the best spirit of the Italian Renaissance marked the first outburst of a national feeling of a people as yet possessed of no national literature of importance, but unwilling longer to depend on foreign (French) influences for the cultural elements in their intellectual life.

It was at Halle, too, that Gundling, in 1711, discussed "the office of a university" and laid down the modern university theory of Lehrfreiheit und Lernfreiheit—that is, freedom from outside interference in teaching and studying, both teachers and students to be free to follow the truth wherever the truth might lead, and without reference to what preconceived theories might be upset thereby. This was a revolution in university procedure, [2] and the importance of the establishment of this new conception of university work can scarcely be overestimated. It was a contribution to intellectual progress of large future value. It meant the end of the old-type university, ruled by a narrow theological dogmatism and maintained to give support to a particular religious faith, and the ultimate transformation of the old university foundations into institutions actuated by the methods and purposes of a modern world.

In 1734 another new university was founded at Goettingen, and in this Johann Matthias Gesner (1691-1761) raised the new humanistic learning to the place of first importance. This new university became a nursery for the new literary humanism, ably supplementing the work done at Halle. From these two universities teachers of a new type went out, filled with the spirit of "The Enlightenment," as this eighteenth-century German renaissance was called, and they in time regenerated all the German universities. Still more, they regenerated the secondary schools of German lands as well, and gave Greek literature and life that place of first importance in their instruction which was retained until the latter part of the nineteenth century. Gesner at Goettingen, and later Ernesti at Leipzig, did much to formulate the new pedagogical purpose [3] of instruction in the ancient languages and literatures for the higher schools of German lands.

THE EARLIEST SCHOOL LAWS FOR PRUSSIA. In 1713 there came to the kingship of Prussia an organizing genius in the person of Frederic William I (1713- 40). Under his direction Prussia was given, for the first time, a centralized and uniform financial administration, and the beginnings of state school organization were made. He freed the State from debt, provided it with a good income, developed a strong army, and began a vigorous colonization and commercial policy. Though he cared nothing and did nothing for the universities, the religious reform movement of Francke, as well as his educational undertakings (p. 419), found in the new King a warm supporter. Largely in consequence of this the King became deeply interested in attempts to improve and advance the education of the masses of his people.

The first year of his reign he issued a Regulatory Code for the Reformed Evangelical and Latin schools of Prussia, and in 1717 he issued the so- called "Advisory Order," relating to the people's schools. In this latter parents were urged, under penalty of "vigorous punishment," to send their children to school to learn religion, reading, writing, to calculate, and "all that could serve to promote their happiness and welfare." The tuition fees of poor children he ordered paid out of the community poor-box (R. 273). The following year he directed the authorities of Lithuania to relieve the existing ignorance there, and sent commissioners to provide the villages with schoolmasters. From time to time he renewed his directions. To insure a better class of teachers for the towns and rural schools, he, in 1722, directed that no one be admitted to the office of sacristan-schoolmaster [4] except tailors, weavers, smiths, wheelwrights, and carpenters, and in 1738 he further restricted the position of teacher in the town and rural schools to tailors.



Becoming especially interested in providing schools for the previously neglected province of East Prussia, he gave the sum of fifty thousand thalers as an endowment fund, the interest to be used in assisting communities to build schoolhouses and maintain schools, and he also set aside large tracts of land for school uses. Within a few years over a thousand elementary schools had been established, and some eighteen hundred new schools in Prussia owed their origin to the interest of this King. He also took a similar interest in the establishment of schools in Pomerania (R. 273), a part of which had but recently been wrested from Sweden.

In 1737 the King issued his celebrated Principia Regulative, which henceforth became the fundamental School Law for the province of East Prussia. This prescribed conditions for the building of schoolhouses, the support of the schoolmaster, tuition fees, and government aid. The following digest of the section of the Principia relating to these matters gives a good idea as to the nature of the school regulations the King sought to enforce:

1. The parishes forming school societies were obliged to build school- houses and to keep them in repair.

2. The State was to furnish the necessary timber and firewood.

3. The expenses for doors, windows, and stoves to be obtained from collections.

4. Every church to pay four thalers a year toward the support of the schoolmaster.

5. Tuition fees for each child, from four to twelve years of age, to be four groschen per year.

6. Government to pay the fee when a peasant sends more than one child to school.

7. The peasants to furnish the teacher with certain provisions.

8. The teacher to have the right of free pasture for his small stock and some fees from every child confirmed.

9. Government to give the teacher one acre of land, which villagers were to till for him.

In 1738 the King further regulated the private schools and teachers in and about Berlin, in particular dealing with their qualifications and fees. The King showed, for the time, an interest in and solicitude for the education of his people heretofore almost unknown. That his decrees were in advance of the possibilities of the people in the matter of school support is not to be wondered at. Still, they rendered useful service in preparing the way for further organizing work by his successors, and in particular in accustoming the people to the ideas of state oversight and local school support. Under his successor and son, Frederick the Great, the preparatory work of the father bore important fruit.

THE ORGANIZING WORK OF FREDERICK THE GREAT. In 1740 Frederick II, surnamed the Great, succeeded his father, and in turn guided the destinies of Prussia for forty-six years. His benevolently despotic rule has been described on a preceding page (p. 474). Here we will consider only his work for education. In 1740, 1741, and again in 1743 he issued "regulations concerning the support of schools in the villages of Prussia," in which he directed that new schools should be established, teachers provided for them, and that "the existing school regulations and the arrangements made in pursuance thereto should be permanent, and that no change should be made under any pretext whatever."

In 1750 he effected a centralization of all the provincial church consistories, except that of Catholic Silesia, under the Berlin Consistory. This was a centralizing measure of large future importance, as it centralized the administration of the schools, as well as that of the churches, and transformed the Berlin Consistory into an important administrative agent of the central government. To this new centralized administrative organization the King issued instructions to pay special attention to schools, in order that they might be furnished with able schoolmasters and the young be well educated. One of the results of this centralization was the gradual evolution of the modern German Gymnasien, with uniform standards and improved instruction, out of the old and weakened Latin schools of various types within the kingdom.

From 1756 to 1763 Frederick was engaged in a struggle for existence, known as the Seven Years' War, but as soon as peace was at hand the King issued new regulations "concerning the maintenance of schools," and began employing competent schoolmasters for his royal estates. In April, 1763, he issued instructions to have a series of general school regulations prepared for all Prussia. These were drawn up by Julius Hecker, a former pupil and teacher in Francke's Institution (p. 418) and now a pastor in Berlin and counselor for the Berlin Consistory. After approval by the King, these were issued, September 23, 1763, under the title of General Land-Schule Reglement (general school regulations for the rural and village schools) of all Prussia (R. 274). These new regulations constituted the first general School Code for the whole kingdom, and mark the real foundation of the Prussian elementary-school system. Two years later (1765) a similar but stronger set of regulations or Code was drawn up and promulgated for the government of the Catholic elementary schools in the province of Silesia (R. 275). This was a new province which Frederick had wrested by force a few years previously (1748) from Maria Theresa of Austria, and the addition of a large number of Catholics to Prussia caused Frederick to issue specific regulations for schools among them.



These two School Codes did not so much bring already existing schools into a state system, but rather set up standards and obligations for an elementary-school system in part to be created in the future. The schools were still left under the supervision and direction of the Church, but the State now undertook to tell the Church what it must do. To enforce the obligation the State Inspectors of Prussia were directed to make an annual inspection (R. 274, sec 26) of all schools, and to forward a report on their inspection to the Berlin Consistory, and for Catholic Silesia the following significant injunction was placed in the Code:

sec 51. In order to render as permanent as possible this reform of schools, which lies near our heart, we cannot be satisfied with committing the care of the schools to the clergy alone. We find it necessary that our bureau of War and Domain, the bureau of the Episcopal Vicariate, and the dioceses in our Silesian and Glatz districts, as well as our special school inspectors, give all due attention to this subject, so important to the State.

THE PRUSSIAN SCHOOL CODES OF 1763 AND 1765. The regulations of 1763 were issued, so the introduction reads (R. 274), because "the instruction of youth" in the country had "come to be greatly neglected" and "the young people were growing up in stupidity and ignorance." The King, therefore, issued the new regulations "to the end that ignorance, so injurious and unbecoming to Christianity, may be prevented and lessened, and the coming time may train and educate in the schools more enlightened and virtuous subjects."

To this end the King ordered compulsory education for the children of all subjects from the ages of five to thirteen or fourteen, all apprentices to be taught, and leaving certificates to be issued on completion of the course (R. 274, sec 1-4). The school hours were fixed, Sunday and summer instruction regulated, tuition fees standardized, and the fees of the children of the poor were ordered paid (R. 274, sec 5-8). A school census, and fines on parents not sending their children to school were provided for (R. 274, sec 10-11). The requirements for a teacher, his habits, his qualifications and examination, the license to teach, and the extent to which he might ply his trade or business, were all laid down in some detail (R. 274 sec 12-17). The organization, instruction, textbooks, order of exercises, and discipline for all schools were prescribed at some length (R. 274, sec 19-21). The Code closed with a series of regulations covering the relations of the schoolmaster and clergyman, and the supervision of the instruction by the clergyman and clerical superintendents (R. 274, sec 25-26). Incapable teachers were ordered suspended or deposed. A a final injunction relative to school attendance the Code closed with the following sentence:

In general we here confirm and renew all wholesome laws, published in former times, especially, that no clergyman shall admit to confirmation and the sacrament, any children not of his parish, nor those unable to read, or who are ignorant of the fundamental principles of evangelical religion.

The Code of 1765 for the Catholic schools of Silesia followed much the same line as the Code of 1763, though in it the King placed special emphasis on the training of schoolmasters, a subject in which he had become much interested (R. 275 a); the regulation of the conditions under which teachers lived and worked (R. 275 b); and the supervision of instruction by the clergyman of the parish (R. 275 e). These directions throw much light on the conditions surrounding teaching near the middle of the eighteenth century. The nature of instruction in the Catholic schools, and the compulsion to attend, were also definitely stated (R. 275 c-d).

These new Codes met with resistance everywhere. The money for the execution of such a comprehensive project was not as yet generally available; parents and churches objected to taxation and to the loss of their children from work; the wealthy landlords objected to the financial burden; the standards for teachers later on (1779) had to be lowered, and veterans from Frederick's wars installed; and the examinations of teachers had to be made easy [5] to secure teachers at all for the schools. While there continued for some decades to be a vast difference between the actual conditions in the schools and the requirements of these Codes, and while the real establishment of a state school system awaited the first decade of the nineteenth century for its accomplishment, much valuable progress in organization nevertheless was made. In principle, at least, Frederick the Great, by the Codes of 1763 and 1765, effected for elementary education a transition from the church school of the Protestant Reformation, and for Catholic Silesia from the parish school of the Church, to the state school of the nineteenth century. It remained only for his successors to realize in practice what he had made substantial beginnings of in law. Nowhere else in Europe that early had such progress in educational organization been made.

THE PRUSSIAN EXAMPLE FOLLOWED IN OTHER GERMAN STATES. The example of Prussia was in time followed by the other larger German States. Wuertemberg issued a new School Code in 1792, which remained the ruling law for the church schools throughout the eighteenth century. The Saxon King, Augustus the Just, inspired by the example of Frederick, issued a mandate, in 1766, reminding parents as to their duty to send children to school, and in 1773 issued a new Regulation, filled with "generous enthusiasm for the cause." A teachers' training-school was founded at Dresden, in 1788, and four others before the close of the century. In 1805 a comprehensive Code was issued. This required that every child must be able to read, write, count, and know the truths of religion to receive the sacrament; clergymen were ordered to supervise the schools; school attendance was required from six to fourteen; the pay of teachers and the government appropriations for schools were increased; and a series of fines were imposed for violations of the Code. Bavaria issued new school Codes in 1770 and 1778, and additional schoolhouses were built and new textbooks written. After the suppression of the Jesuits (1773) a new progressive spirit animated the Catholic States, and Austria in particular, under the leadership of Maria Theresa and Joseph II (p. 475), made marked progress in school organization and educational reform.

In 1770 Maria Theresa appointed a School Commission to have charge of education in Lower Austria; in 1771 established the first Austrian normal school in Vienna; and in 1774 promulgated a General School Code (R. 276), drawn up by the Abbot Felbiger, who had been most prominent in school organization in Silesia. This Code provided for School Commissions in all provinces [6] ordered the establishment of an elementary school in all villages and parishes, a "principal" or higher elementary school in the principal city of every canton, and a normal school in every province; laid down the course of study for each; and gave details as to teachers, instruction, compulsory attendance, support, and inspection similar to Frederick's Silesian Code (R. 275). Continuation instruction up to twenty years of age also was ordered. That such demands were much in advance of what was possible is evident, and it is not surprising that, in the reaction under Francis I, following the outburst of the French Revolution, we find a decree (1805) that the elementary school shall be curtailed to "absolutely necessary limits," and that the common people shall get in elementary school only such ideas as will not trouble them in their work, and which will not make them "discontented with their condition; their intelligence shall be directed toward the fulfillment of their moral duties, and prudent and diligent fulfillment of their domestic and communal obligations."

THE BEGINNINGS OF TEACHER-TRAINING. The beginning of teacher-training in German lands was the Seminarium Praceptorum of Francke, established at Halle (p. 419), in 1697. In 1738 Johann Julius Hecker (1707-68), one of Francke's former students and teachers, and the author of the Prussian Code of 1763, established the first regular seminary for teachers in Prussia, to train intending theological students for the temporary or parallel occupation of teaching in the Latin schools. In 1747 he established a private Lehrerseminar in Berlin, in connection with his celebrated Realschule (p. 420), and there demonstrated the possibilities of teacher-training. Frederick the Great was so pleased with the result that, in 1753, he gave the school a subsidy and changed it into a royal institution, and on every fitting occasion recommended school authorities to it for teachers. Similar institutions were opened in Hanover, in 1751; Wolfenbuettel, in 1753; in the county of Glatz in Silesia, in 1764 (R. 275); in Breslau, in 1765 and 1767; and in Carlsruhe, in 1768. In the Silesian Code of 1765 Frederick specified (R. 275 a, sec 2) six institutions which he had designated as teacher-training schools.

These early Prussian institutions laid the foundations upon which the normal-school system of the nineteenth century has been built. In Prussia first, but soon thereafter in other German States (Austria, at Vienna, 1771; Saxe-Weimar, at Eisenach, in 1783; and Saxony, at Dresden, 1788) the Teachers' Seminary was erected into an important institution of the State, and the idea has since been copied by almost all modern nations. This early development in Prussia was influential in both France and the United States, as we shall point out further on.

Despite these many important educational efforts, though, the type and the work of teachers remained low throughout the whole of the eighteenth century. In the rural and village schools the teachers continued to be deficient in number and lacking in preparation. Often the pastors had first to give to invalids, cripples, shoemakers, tailors, watchmen, and herdsmen the rudimentary knowledge they in turn imparted to the children. In the towns of fair size the conditions were not much better than in the villages. The elementary school of the middle-sized towns generally had but one class, common for boys and girls, and the magistrates did little to improve the condition of the schools or the teachers. In the larger cities, and even in Berlin, the number of elementary schools was insufficient, the schools were crowded, and many children had no opportunity to attend schools. [7] In Leipzig there was no public school until 1792, in which year the city free school was established. Even Sunday schools, supported by subscription, had been resorted to by Berlin, after 1798, to provide journeymen and apprentices with some of the rudiments of an education. The creation of a state school system out of the insufficient and inefficient religious schools proved a task of large dimensions, in Prussia as in other lands. Even as late as 1819 Dinter found discouraging conditions (R. 279) among the teachers of East Prussia.



FURTHER LATE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY PROGRESS. Frederick the Great died in 1786. In the reign of his successors his work bore fruit in a complete transfer of all schools from church to state control, and in the organization of the strongest system of state schools the world had ever known. The year following the death of Frederick the Great (1787), and largely as an outgrowth of the preceding centralizing work with reference to elementary education, the Superior School (Oberschulcollegium) Board was established to exercise a similar centralized control over the older secondary and higher schools of Prussia. Secondary and higher education were now severed from church control, in principle at least, as elementary education had been by the "Regulations" of 1763 and 1765. The year following (1788) "Leaving Examinations" (Maturitaetspruefung) were instituted to determine the completion of the gymnasial course. These, for a time, were largely ineffective, due to clerical opposition, but the centralizing work of this Superior School Board for the supervision of higher education, and the state examinations for testing the instruction of the secondary schools, were from the first important contributing influences.

In 1794 came the culmination of all the preceding work in the publication of the General Civil Code (Allgemeine Landrecht) for the State, in which, in the section relating to schools, the following important declaration was made:

Schools and universities are state institutions, charged with the instruction of youth in useful information and scientific knowledge. Such institutions may be founded only with the knowledge and consent of the State. All public schools and educational institutions are under the supervision of the State, and are at all times subject to its examination and inspection.

The secular authority and the clergy were still to share jointly in the control of the schools, but both according to rules laid down by the State. In all cases of conflict or dispute, the secular authority was to decide. This important document forms the Magna Charta for secular education in Prussia.

During the decade which followed the promulgation of this declaration of state control but little additional progress of importance was accomplished, though the Minister of Justice, to whom (1798) the administration of Lutheran church and school affairs had been given, maintained a correspondence for some years with the King regarding "provisions for a better education and instruction of the children of citizens and peasants," and stated to the King that "the object of reform is national education, and its field of operation, therefore, all provinces of the monarchy." The King, though, a weak, deeply religious, and unimaginative man (Frederick William III, 1797-1840), who lacked the energy and foresight of his predecessors, did little or nothing. Under Frederick William III the State lacked vigor and drifted; the Church regained something of its former power; and the army and the civil service became corrupt. In 1806 a blow fell which brought matters to an immediate crisis and forced important action.

II. A STATE SCHOOL SYSTEM AT LAST CREATED

THE HUMILIATION OF PRUSSIA. At the close of 1804 France, by vote, changed from the Republic to an Empire, with Napoleon Bonaparte as first Emperor of the French, and for some years he took pains that Frenchmen should forget "Liberty and Equality" amid the surfeit of "Glory" he heaped upon France. The great nations outside France, fearful of Napoleon's ambition and power, did not take his accession to the throne of France so complacently, and, in 1805, England, Sweden, Austria, and Russia formed the "Third Coalition" against Napoleon in an effort to restore the balance of power in Europe. Of the great powers of Europe only Prussia held aloof, refused to take sides, and in consequence enjoyed a temporary prosperity and freedom from invasion. For this, though, she was soon to pay a terrible price. Having humiliated the Austrians and vanquished the Russians, Napoleon now goaded the Prussians into attacking him, and then utterly humiliated them in turn. At the battle of Jena (October 14, 1806) the Prussian army was utterly routed, and forced back almost to the Russian frontier. Officered by old generals and political favorites who were no longer efficient, and backed by a state service honeycombed with inefficiency and corruption, the Prussian army that had won such victories under Frederick the Great was all but annihilated by the new and efficient fighting machine created by the Corsican who now controlled the destinies of France. By the Treaty of Tilsit (July 7, 1807) Prussia lost all her lands west of the Elbe and nearly all her stealings from Poland—in all about one half her territory and population—and was almost stricken from the list of important powers in Europe. In all its history Prussia had experienced no such humiliation as this. In a few months the constructive work of a century had been undone.

THE REGENERATION OF PRUSSIA. The new national German feeling, which had been slowly rising for half a century, now burst forth and soon worked a regeneration of the State. In the school of adversity the King and the people learned much, and the task of national reorganization was entrusted to a series of able ministers whom the King and his capable Queen, Louise, now called into service. His chief minister, Stein, created a free people by abolishing serfdom and feudal land tenure (1807); eliminated feudal distinctions in business; granted local government to the cities; and broke the hold of the clergy on the educational system. His successor, Hardenburg, extended the rights of citizenship, and laid the foundations of government by legislative assemblies. Another minister, Scharnhorst, reorganized the Prussian army (1807-13) by dismissing nearly all the old generals, and introducing the principle of compulsory military service. In all branches of the government service there were reorganizations, the one thought of the leaders being to so reorganize and revitalize the State as to enable it in time to overthrow the rule of Napoleon and regain its national independence.

Though the abolition of serfdom, the reform of the civil service, and the beginnings of local and representative government were important gains, nothing was of secondary importance to the complete reorganization of education which now took place. The education of the people was turned to in earnest for the regeneration of the national spirit, and education was, in a decade, made the great constructive agent of the State. Said the King:

Though we have lost many square miles of land, though the country has been robbed of its external power and splendor, yet we shall and will gain in intrinsic power and splendor, and therefore it is my earnest wish that the greatest attention be paid to public instruction.... The State must regain in mental force what it has lost in physical force.

His minister Stein said:

We proceed from the fundamental principle, to elevate the moral, religious, and patriotic spirit in the nation, to instil into it again courage, self-reliance, and readiness to sacrifice everything for national honor and for independence from the foreigner.... To attain this end, we must mainly rely on the education and instruction of the young. If by a method founded on the true nature of man, every faculty of the mind can be developed, every noble principle of life be animated and nourished, all one-sided education avoided, and those tendencies on which the power and dignity of men rest, hitherto neglected with the greatest indifference, carefully fostered—then we may hope to see grow up a generation, physically and morally vigorous, and the beginnings of a better time.

FICHTE APPEALS TO THE LEADERS. Still more did the philosopher Fichte (1762-1814), in a series of "Addresses to the German Nation," delivered in Berlin during the winter [8] of 1807-08, appeal to the leaders to turn to education to rescue the State from the miseries which had overwhelmed it. Unable forcibly to resist, and with every phase of the government determined by a foreign conqueror, only education had been overlooked, he said, and to this the leaders should turn for national redemption (R. 277). He held that it rested with them to determine

whether you will be the end and last of a race ... or the beginnings and germ of a new time, glorious beyond all your imaginings, and those from whom posterity will reckon the years of their welfare.... A nation that is capable, if it were only in its highest representation and leaders, of fixing its eyes firmly on the vision from the spiritual world, Independence, and being possessed with a love of it, will surely prevail over a nation that is only used as a tool of foreign aggressiveness and for the subjugation of independent nations.

With a fervor of emotion that was characteristic of a romantic age, impelled by a conviction that the distinctive character of the German people was indispensable to the world, and holding that what was necessary also was possible, Fichte made the German leaders feel, with him, that

to reshape reality by means of ideas is the business of man, his proper earthly task; and nothing can be impossible to a will confident of itself and of its aim. [9]



Fichte's Addresses stirred the thinkers among the German people as they had not been stirred since the days of the Reformation, [10] and a national reorganization of education, with national ends in view, now took place. As Duke Ernest remade Gotha, after the ravages of the Thirty Years' War, by means of education (p. 317), so the leaders of Prussia now created a new national spirit by taking over the school from the Church and forging it into one of the greatest constructive instruments of the State. The result showed itself in the "Uprising of Prussia," in the winter of 1812-13; the "War of Liberation," of 1813-15; the utter defeat of Napoleon at the battle of Leipzig by Russia, Prussia, and Austria, in 1813; and again at the battle of Waterloo by England and Prussia, [11] in 1815. Still more clearly was the result shown in the humiliating defeat of France, in 1870, when it was commonly remarked that the schoolmaster of Prussia had at last triumphed. The regeneration of Prussia in the early part of the nineteenth century, as well as its more recent humiliation, stand as eloquent testimonials to the tremendous influence of education on national destiny, when rightly and when wrongly directed.

THE REORGINATION OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION. The first step in the process of educational reorganization was the abolition (1807) of the Oberschulcollegium Board, established (p. 564) in 1787 to supervise secondary and higher education, in order to get rid of clerical influence and control. The next step was the creation instead (1808) of a Department of Public Instruction, organized as a branch of the Interior Department of the State.

One of the first steps of the acting head of the new department was to send seventeen Prussian teachers (1808) to Switzerland to spend three years, at the expense of the Government, in studying Pestalozzi's ideas and methods, and they were particularly enjoined that they were not sent primarily to get the mechanical side of the method, but to

"warm yourselves at the sacred fire which burns in the heart of this man, so full of strength and love, whose work has remained so far below what he originally desired, below the essential ideas of his life, of which the method is only a feeble product.

"You will have reached perfection when you have clearly seen that education is an art, and the most sublime and holy of all, and in what connection it is with the great art of the education of nations."

In 1809 Carl August Zeller (1774-1847), a pupil of Pestalozzi, who had established two Pestalozzian training-colleges in Switzerland and had just begun to hold Pestalozzian institutes in Wuertemberg (p. 545), was called to Prussia to organize a Teachers' Seminary (normal school) to train teachers in the Pestalozzian methods. The seventeen Prussian teachers, on their return from study with Pestalozzi, were also made directors of training institutions, or provincial superintendents of instruction. In this way Pestalozzian ideas were soon in use in the elementary school rooms of Prussia, and so effective was this work, and so readily did the Prussian teachers catch the spirit of Pestalozzi's endeavors, that at the Berlin celebration of the centennial of his birth, in 1846, the German educator Diesterweg [12] said:

By these men and these means, men trained in the Institution at Yverdon under Pestalozzi, the study of his publications, and the applications of his methods in the model and normal schools of Prussia, after 1808, was the present Prussian, or rather Prussian- Pestalozzian school system established, for he is entitled to at least one half the fame of the German popular schools.



Similarly Gustavus Friedrich Dinter, who early distinguished himself as principal of a Teachers' Seminary in Saxony, was called to Prussia and made School Counselor (Superintendent) for the province of East Prussia. Wherever Prussia could find men, in other States, who knew Pestalozzian methods and possessed the new conception of education, they were called to Prussia and put to work, and the statement of Dinter was characteristic of the spirit which animated their work. He said: [13]

I promised God, that I would look upon every Prussian peasant child as a being who could complain of me before God, if I did not provide him with the best education, as a man and a Christian, which it was possible for me to provide.

WORK OF THE TEACHERS SEMINARIES. Napoleon had imposed heavy financial indemnities on Prussia, as well as loss of territory, and the material means with which to establish schools were scanty indeed. With a keen conception of the practical difficulties, the leaders saw that the key to the problem lay in the creation of a new type of teaching force, and to this end they began from the first to establish Teachers' Seminaries. Those who desired to enter these institutions were carefully selected, and out of them a steady stream of what Horace Mann described (R. 278) as a "beneficent order of men" were sent to the schools, "moulding the character of the people, and carrying them forward in a career of civilization more rapidly than any other people in the world are now advancing." Mann described, with marked approval, both the teacher and the training he received.

So successful were these institutions that within a decade, under the glow of the new national spirit animating the people, the elementary schools were largely transformed in spirit and purpose, and the position of the elementary-school teacher was elevated from the rank of a trade (R. 279) to that of a profession (R. 278). By 1840, when the earlier fervor had died out and a reaction had clearly set in, there were in Prussia alone thirty-eight Teachers' Seminaries for elementary teachers, approximately thirty thousand elementary schools, and every sixth person in Prussia was in school. In the other German States, and in Holland, Sweden, and France, analogous but less extensive progress in providing normal schools and elementary schools had been made; but in Austria, which did not for long follow the Prussian example, the schools remained largely stationary for more than half a century to come.



NATIONALIZING THE ELEMENTARY INSTRUCTION. That the system of elementary vernacular or people's schools (the term Volksschule now began to be applied) now created should be permeated by a strong nationalistic tone was, the times and circumstances considered, only natural. Though the Pestalozzian theories as to the development of the mental faculties, training through the senses, and the power of education to regenerate society were accepted, along with the new Pestalozzian subject-matter and methods in instruction (p. 543,) all that could be rendered useful to the Prussian State in its extremity naturally was given special emphasis. Thus all that related to the home country—geography, history, and the German speech—was taught as much from the patriotic as from the pedagogical point of view. Music was given special emphasis as preparatory for participation in the patriotic singing-societies and festivals, which were organized at the time of the "Uprising of Prussia" (1813). Drawing and arithmetic were emphasized for their practical values. Physical exercises were given an emphasis before unknown, because of their hygienic and military values. Finally religion was given an importance beyond that of Pestalozzi's school, but with the emphasis now placed on moral earnestness, humility, self-sacrifice, and obedience to authority, rather than the earlier stress on the Catechism and church doctrine.

Clearly perceiving, decades ahead of other nations, the power of such training to nationalize a people and thus strengthen the State, the Prussian leaders, in the first two decades of the nineteenth century, laid the foundations of that training of the masses, and of teachers for the masses (R. 280), which, more than any other single item, paved the way for the development of a national German spirit, the unification of German lands into an Imperial German Empire, and that blind trust in and obedience to authority which has recently led to a second national humiliation.

THE REORGANIZATION OF SECONDARY EDUCATION. Alongside this elementary- school system for the masses of the people, the older secondary and higher school system for a directing class (p. 553) also was largely reorganized and redirected. The first step in this direction was the appointment, in 1809, of Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835), "a philosopher, scholar, philologist, and statesman" of the first rank, to the headship of the new Prussian Department of Public Instruction. During the two and a half years he remained in charge important work in the reorganization of secondary and higher education was accomplished. In 1817 the Department of Public Instruction was changed from a bureau to an independent Ministry for Spiritual and Instructional Affairs. By 1825, when governing school boards were ordered established in each province, and made responsible to the Ministry for Education at Berlin, the organization of the state school system was virtually complete. For the next half-century the changes made were in the nature of the perfection of bureaucratic organization, rather than any fundamental organizing change. During the early years improvements of great future importance for secondary education were effected in the creation of a well-educated, professional teaching body, and in the standardization of courses and of work.

In 1810 the examination of all secondary-school teachers, according to a uniform state plan, was ordered. The examinations were to be conducted for the State by the university authorities; to be based on university training in the gymnasial subjects, with an opportunity to reveal special preparation in any subject or subjects; and no one in the future could even be nominated for a position as a gymnasial teacher who had not passed this examination. This meant the erection of the work of teaching in the secondary schools into a distinct profession; the elimination from the schools of the theological student who taught for a time as a stepping- stone to a church living; and the end of easy local examination and approval by town authorities or the patrons of a school. To insure still better preparation of candidates, Pedagogical Seminars were begun in the universities [14] for imparting to future gymnasial teachers some pedagogical knowledge and insight, while Philological Seminars also appeared, about the same time, [15] to give additional training in understanding the spirit of instruction in the chief subjects of the gymnasial course—the classics. In 1826 a year of trial teaching before appointment (Probejahr) was added for all candidates, and in 1831 new and more stringent regulations for the examination of teachers were ordered. [16] At least two generations ahead of other nations, Prussia thus developed a body of professional teachers for its secondary schools.

UNIFICATION OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOLS. In 1812 the Leaving Examinations (Maturitaetspruefung), instituted in 1788, but ineffective through clerical opposition, were revived and strictly enforced. In 1834 the passing of such an examination was made necessary to entering nearly all branches of the state civil service, thus securing an educated body of minor public officials. This same year the universities gave up their entrance examinations, and have since depended entirely on the Leaving Examinations of the State.

The immediate effect of the reinstitution of the Leaving Examinations was to unify the work of all the different surviving types of classical secondary schools—Gymnasium, Lyceum, Paedagogium, Collegium, Lateinische Schule, Akademie—all standard nine-year schools henceforth taking the name of Gymnasien. Those institutions which could not meet the standards of a nine-year classical school were either permitted to do the first six years of the work, being known as Pro-Gymnasien, or the modern languages were substituted for the ancient, and they became middle-class institutions under the name of Buergerschulen. A few Realschulen also were in existence, and these were permitted to continue, as middle-class institutions, but without any state recognition. Thus, without the destruction of institutions, the accumulated foundations of the centuries were transformed into a series of organized state schools to serve the needs of the State.

The next step was the promulgation of a uniform course of instruction for all Gymnasien and Pro-Gymnasien. This was done in 1816. The studies were Latin, Greek, German, mathematics, history, geography, religion, and science, the amount of time to be devoted to each ranging, in the order listed, from a maximum for Latin to a minimum for science. Up to 1824 Greek was not absolutely required; from 1824 to 1837 it was required, unless the substitution of a modern language was permitted; but after 1837, when the type of German secondary school had become fairly well fixed, and the devotion to humanistic studies had reached a climax, Greek became a fixed and unvarying requirement. [17]