upon a country which believed its own efforts indispensable for the progress of the race, it was Renaissance Italy, and it was more nearly right than contemporaries usually have been; but the political power of Italy was then, and remained until the nineteenth century, a shadow. Few countries in the whole history of the race have achieved such wholehearted and unanimous admiration as France possessed in the eighteenth century. Its very name was synonymous with what was to contemporaries civilization itself; its loss or destruction would have seemed irreparable. Yet in 1815 practically the whole civilized world congratulated itself upon the downfall, nay, upon the practical destruction of France, and upon the consequent saving of civilization.

If there is anything in the tenet of the relativity of truth, we have not now and are not likely to have any notion of what is really indispensable to the future of civilization, because we have not and cannot have a definite notion of what the future of civilization is. It ought to be sufficient for us to remember that northwestern Europe, which we now look upon as the seat of civilization, was, at the birth of Christ, scarcely known to be upon the globe, and was in all honesty believed by scientists to be the place where the world came to an end and space began. And in the history of the race and of the world two thousand years are but a moment. In reality we are dealing to-day with essentially different notions of civilization, of its object, of the methods. necessary to attain it, of the hands which will perform the work. It is the difference of opinion about the future which lies at the root of the present difficulty,

and in that opinion we shall find, as in a lookingglass, the images of the nations as they successively step forward. They differ in their national character, their ideas of morality, their ideas of the future because of their past. Their national aims and ambitions are the result of the history of Europe, the result of their deep hatreds, antagonisms, and rivalries during the fifteen hundred years since their ancestors poured down from the forests of the North upon the provinces of decadent Rome. From such a long and tangled past have come deep-rooted ideas, intense passions, strong beliefs, determinations to prevail. It is with these we have to deal.

Somehow, in some way of which we know nothing, the future civilization will emerge, as in the past, from the clash of these ideals and ambitions. The past makes it clear that civilization will be safeguarded, whatever happens. The future no more depends upon a single race or a single nation than a nation depends upon a single individual. When we talk of worlds, of aeons of time, of the human race itself and the future of its civilization, nations, like individuals, become pygmies and almost disappear from sight. We cannot tell in advance what the future is going to be, we cannot tell in advance which of us will render the service which will be seen a thousand years hence to have been important; but surely we can all be pardoned for believing that we have some part to play in it. The real problem with which we have to deal is not that of providing for civilization's future, but that of providing for the immediate future of those of us who are now alive.

The task of estimating the character of presentday classroom instruction is a difficult one at best. When the problem becomes one of tracing the evolution of method, of judging the teaching of generations ago, this difficulty is greatly increased. The information must come from source material, from those fragments of the writings and records of the past which happen to have been preserved. This means, of necessity, that the material is not complete; that the whole story cannot be told, and that the results of this investigation can be considered only as indicative of the true conditions of the time.

"When the institution was commencing its existence," said the principal of Albany Female Academy in 1838, "two methods of instruction divided the schools. In the colleges, lectures were given, ex1 The data are (1) the remarks of men who were trained at the time; (2) the introductions, prefaces and "remarks to teachers" in early text-books; and (3) a rather remarkable collection of reports from academy principals, collected by Gideon Hawley, and published in the reports of the New York Regents in the years 1835-1847.

planations made and books provided, that the student might extend his researches upon his subject beThis we think yond the author studied. a plan for beginning a study, which being right will never be improved. The other method, which was pursued in elementary schools, was to make the scholar say his lessons, no matter whether he understood them or not. This we hold to be a miserable method to begin to teach a subject." 2 This division of methods, in general, has persisted to the present day. The teaching in the institutions of higher learning has always been principally through lectures; the text-book has remained the chief source of material for the secondary school.

Method makes progress slowly. Teachers, conservative at best, are slow to adopt innovations. Individuals may experiment successfully, but results in general practice are attained only after a long period of time. In consequence general development is difficult to trace. It is proposed first to consider the

2 New York, "Report of the Regents of the University to the Senate," 1838, p. 88.

portant sections, was not without its earliest advocates among the teachers themselves. The principal of De Ruyter Institute reports in 1838:

"To this course (rote work) we rigidly intend to adhere, as it is thought that there is great danger of obtaining only a superficial knowledge of studies, by permitting students in their answer to give, as it is termed, the substance of the author." 9

Plattsburg Academy in 1840 says:

"We require to be committed to memory exactly in the language of the text-book. We think that by that course we not only secure as good or better understanding of the principles required to be learned, as is obtained by leaving pupils to express the idea in their own language, but we also secure a habit of precision and accuracy of language, which the other system tends rather to destroy." 10

Kinderhook Academy in 1841 said:

"If the author has not expressed the idea in the best language, he is deficient and ought not to be used; and if his own expression is good, let the pupil commit it as it stands, rather than take up that which is inferior." 11

Auburn Academy in 1839 took the following stand: "With regard to the question to what extent the processes of education may usefully be addressed to the mere power of memory, the trustees abstain from entering into that extended course of remark concerning it, without which it would be impossible to do justice to the subject. The great purposes of education are to store the mind (which in this sense is but another name for memory) with useful knowledge; and in the process of doing so to give increased energy, activity and precision to the mental faculties.

"Any system of instruction which is not directed to each of these ends is radically erroneous. . . .

"There is in this age of the world an abundant store of useful knowledge, in the acquisition of which to give ample exercise to all the faculties; and what is worth acquiring is worth remembering. Any mode of instruction, therefore, which does not systematically and studiously aim at the accomplishment of this as one of its primary ends, must be defective." 12

Johnstown Academy made the following statement in 1837:

"Yet in all instances, the memory as well as the understanding, must be cultivated. It is the depository of knowledge, the reservoir from which we derive, and from which we draw those streams of learning which we may apply on any future or contingent emergency. Without a proper cultivation of this useful faculty no impression would be lasting, all knowledge would become evanescent, and every effort to render learning practically useful would necessarily prove abortive." 13

Whitesboro Academy reports in 1840 as follows: "It is a frequent complaint with individuals that they soon forget all that they have learned at school. Young men, too, in leaving our colleges to teach, frequently find that they know nothing of the subjects in which they thought themselves well versed. They have not a clear idea

9 New York, op. cit., 1838, p. 94. 10 New York, op. cit., 1840, p. 94. 11 New York, op. cit., 1841, p. 92. 12 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 126. 13 New York, op. cit., 1837, p. 90.

(b) Modified Forms of Rote Work.

The radical views just cited were not held by all teachers of the time. More liberal methods were advocated by many. The transition is gradual, and many and varied are the excuses and explanations offered to account for the change.

Some teachers hold to the old method, while presenting an explanation to their critics. For illustration, the Onondaga Academy said, in 1838:

"If I had a student so unfortunately constituted as to be incapable of thinking and reasoning upon a subject, I enjoin upon him to commit his rules to memory, content to make him an apt machine, if I cannot make him a skilful accountant, for with such an explanation it soon becomes like everything else that they may learn, a matter of rote." 21

The principal of Troy Female Seminary replied as follows:

...

"There are certain subjects of study, which must, of course, be learned memoriter. . . . But in such subjects as history, etc., the method of requiring a few sentences to be repeated by rote, is wholly absurd. . . . The teacher's first business is to make his pupils understand the subject, etc. . . . When the author's own clue to the subject is once fairly obtained, fluency of speech will follow, and the pupil of taste will rarely fail of committing to memory the finest passages of the finest writers, and we consider that taste and style are both improved in the exercise. Such a pupil may be said by the ignorant to recite memoriter; but the better informed perceive by the eye, intonation and the emphasis, that the words used stand in the mind of the speaker as signs of ideas, which he has by study, made his own." 22

Another tendency is to emphasize both understanding and memory, but in a reverse order. Plattsburg Academy said in 1837, for instance, that the pupil must show that "not only has he learned exactly his lessons, but that he also understands them." 23 Cambridge Washington Academy reports, "Many students have committed to memory the Constitution of the United States, and had it familiarly explained to them."

"24

14 New York, op. cit., 1840, p. 99. 15 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 119. 16 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 116. 17 New York, op. cit., 1836, p. 73. 18 New York, op. cit., 1844, p. 141. 19 New York, op. cit., 1840, p. 99. 20 New York, op. cit., 1840, p. 100. 21 New York, op. cit., 1837, p. 100. 22 New York, op. cit., 1838, p. 90. 23 New York, op. cit., 1837, p. 88. 24 New York, op. cit., 1838, p. 92.

A compromise often made is illustrated by the following excerpt from the report of the Delaware Academy in 1838:

"All definitions and rules are required to be given in the precise language of the author; in most other parts of the branches of study the student is allowed to clothe the author's meaning in his own words." 25

This is the most common form of belief in regard to rote work which was held by the school men during this period, if frequency of mention in the reports is an indication. Among the schools showing this same tendency were Gouveneur High School,2" Westfield Academy, Johnstown Academy, Poughkeepsie Female Academy,20 and Amenia Seminary.30

28

A scheme calculated to preserve the advantages of memoriter work, with the avoidance of many of its dangers, was attempted in many academies. Jefferson Academy reported in 1836 that:

"Originating and writing out questions . . . (without reference to any questions of the author) three or four on a lesson, with a memoriter answer is required. The pupils are admonished that a comparative estimate of scholarship will be made by a comparative estimate of the importance of the questions brought forward.” 31

Thoughtful attention to the content of the subject and careful endeavor in estimating the relative importance of its various parts were here combined with the earnest effort in learning the exact answer, which was so much to be desired. A phase of this same idea was held at Jefferson Academy,32 Amenia Seminary,33 Newburgh Academy,34 Ridgebury Academy,35 Monroe Academy,36 and many others. At Amenia Seminary in 1839, it was said:

"We insist upon familiarity with the subject, and our questions are frequently so directed that the answer cannot be given in the language of the author. But while we object strongly to that course of instruction which permits the student to recite page after page of the author's words, without a proper understanding of his ideas, we think the opposite extreme should be avoided with care. For though it may have a tendency to cultivate habits of thought, it would in more instances lead to habits of superficial reading, and in the end to habits of superficial investigating." 37

Albany Female Academy presented in 1839, the following plan of combining rote work, with adequate understanding of the principles involved:

"We concur with the secretary in the opinion that many subjects at first addressed to the understanding in such a

25 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 109. 26 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 115. 27 New York, op. cit., 1840, p. 105. 28 New York, op. cit., 1836, p. 90. 29 New York, op. cit., 1838, p. 84. 30 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 103. 31 New York, op. cit., 1836, p. 58. 32 New York Report, 1835, pp. 58-9. 33 New York Report, 1837, p. 78. 84 New York Report, 1839, p. 107. 35 New York Report, 1840, p. 89. 36 New York Report, 1836, p. 72.

37 New York Report, 1839, p. 103.

manner as to elicit thought, to teach it to make nice discriminations, and to take general, comprehensive and connected views should then be committed to memory, that the mind may always have them at command, and be able to communicate them.

"Our mode of instruction is directed to these two objects. The pupil is first required to exercise her own power of investigation on any subject. She is examined on it in the daily recitation by the teacher, who then explains and illustrates it in a familiar lecture, in such a manner as will be interesting, fix the attention, and awaken the curiosity. (The teachers, of course, must examine the best works on the subjects they teach, and we provide books for this purpose.) At the next recitation the pupil is required either in answer to questions or by way of analysis, as the subject may be, to give a connected view of the leading ideas of the author in her own language. After thus acquiring a knowledge of the subject, she is required to write an analysis of the most prominent and useful ideas contained in the text-book, making her own selections and employing her own language, or that of her author, as is most convenient. She has thus become perfectly familiar with the subject, and the remaining duty of committing to memory, and explaining in a clear and correct manner, becomes an easy task, while it secures to her the attainment she has made." 38

(c) No Rote Work.

Contemporaneous with, and a possible cause of, these modifications of the memoriter method, was a vigorous opposition to the rote type of teaching. So important, indeed, did the controversy become, that Gideon Hawley, the secretary of the Regents of the University of New York, sent out a questionnaire, calling for the several opinions of the New York academies upon this question. This was repeated for a number of years.

Albany Academy replied as follows in 1835:

"It has ever been a leading object in this institution, as soon as the age of the pupil will allow, to persuade him to commit the substance of his lessons rather than the actual words." 39

ligious Institute in 1840. Similar expressions come from Lowville Academy, Canandaigua Academy,+5 Schenectady Academy, Essex County Academy," Rensellaer Owego Institute, and many others.

48

Upon occasions, faculty psychology worked to the disadvantage of memoriter teaching. When education was believed to consist in the proper training of the various mental faculties, the emphasis upon memory alone would put an undue tax upon a single faculty to the neglect of the rest. An illustration of this argument is found for Genessee Wesleyan Academy for 1838.

"Rules and definitions, being expressed with conciseness in text-books, are committed verbatim. But in regard to principles a different method is preferred for obvious reasons. First, to commit an author's language is an undue tax upon the memory to the neglect of the other faculties of the mind. Science is designed to strengthen and regulate the mind, as a whole. Second, a memorizer may recite fluently while he knows little or nothing intrinsically of the subject submitted to his investigation. The scholar should always be able to state in his own language, the principles he embraces as true, otherwise the slightest failure in memory will involve him in embarrassment. Words may be easily forgotten, but facts engraven on the memory have a more permanent duration. Store the mind with truths and principles, and language will not be wanting in which to clothe them." 49

Rochester Collegiate Institute reported as follows in 1849:

"But in the teaching of history, . . . etc., what demand ought to be made upon the memory of the pupil? Shall the pupil be required to commit the whole lesson to memory? By practice students can be brought to recite pages memoriter at a time; but will they long retain the knowledge thus acquired? All experience, except in a few very uncommon cases, replies in the negative.

"A far better method than this is, so to study the lesson that the pupil may be able to give the facts, thoughts, speculations, in his own language, and in the language which is far removed from that of the author, provided it is only correct and precise. This involves what is called an analysis of the text-book. But analysis is ever a profitable method of study. By practice it becomes easier than mere learning memoriter, and will abide longer in the memory. True, the demand on the teacher is greater, for he must himself know the author, in order to be able to hear an analysis of the lesson and know its correctness or the contrary." 5

50

Gouveneur High School reports upon the success following the abandonment of rote work. They say:

"We have witnessed with increasing satisfaction the success of our attempts to charge the minds of the pupils with ideas rather than burden their memories with words. The practice of memorizing the words of a text-book, and reciting them verbatim, can scarcely fail to divert the attention of the student from the fact that they are intending

44 New York, op. cit., 1836, p. 64. 45 New York, op. cit., 1839, p. 127. 46 New York, op. cit., 1837, p. 87. 47 New York, op. cit., 1841, p. 95. 48 New York, op. cit., 1837, p. 95. 49 New York, op. cit., 1838, p. 98.

50 New York, op. cit., 1849, p. 165.

to communicate, and result in disgust and discouragement." 51

To conclude, rote work had its champions for the first half of the nineteenth century. Teachers were not afraid to argue openly in favor of it. The method was not in disrepute. A well defined opposition, however, was beginning to grow up, which resulted in frequent modifications of, and, in localities, the abandonment of memoriter methods.

It is interesting, then, to note the optimistic statement of C. E. Bush, made in Berard's "History of the United States," in 1878, that:

In a sense, every recitation is a case of question and answer. Even a memoriter exercise necessitates this. But in the sense here used, the catechetical method differentiates itself in that it puts its emphasis upon the text not so much as a matter of phrasing, as upon the proper development of the thought brought out. There is every gradation of this method from rote work in a mechanical fashion, to questions dealing with real problems to be solved, and active solutions to the same.

Many of the early texts were built upon such a plan as to facilitate the easy use of the question and answer method. A popular form was that of a series of questions and answers. Among the text books showing such organization are:

"A. His son Joseph, who died in the year one thousand seven hundred and eleven, at the age of thirty-three. "Q. To whom did the empire afterwards devolve? "A. To his brother, Charles VI, Archduke of Austria, and competitor with Philip V for the crown of Spain. He was the last Emperor of the house of Austria. "Q. How long did he reign?

"A. To the year one thousand seven hundred and forty. He died at the age of fifty-five, and left his hereditary estates to the Archduchess Maria Theresa, his daughter by Elizabeth Christiana, of the house of Wolfenbuttle.

"Q. On whom was the imperial dignity then conferred? "A. On the Elector of Bavaria, who took the name of

51 New York, op. cit., 1840, pp.93-4.

52 C. E. Bush, "Berard's History of the United States."