empirically, has been curiously approved in America by scientific
discovery. It has been shown that after muscles appear too stiff from
exhaustion to move, they can be excited to action by electric
currents; while the motor nerves on being examined after such fatigue
are found to be shrunken and empty, as in extreme old age. The limit
of muscular exertion is thus clearly determined by the limit of the
energy of the motor nerve. Now in a perfectly trained runner, the
heart and lung must obviously reach their prime simultaneously with
the motor nerves used in running; but since these organs are ordained
to supply the entire system with fuel, they will usually require a
longer time to reach prime condition than any single set of nerves.
Thus continual track work is likely to develop the running nerves to
the utmost before the heart and lungs are at prime. Conversely stated,
if the development of the running nerves is retarded so as to keep
pace with the development of the heart and lungs, the total result is
likely to be higher. All this amounts to what any good English trainer
will tell you--that you must take long walks on up and down grades in
order to rest your running muscles and at the same time give your
heart and lungs plenty of work--that is, in order to keep from getting
"track stale."
The amount of work we did from day to day will best be understood,
perhaps, by quoting one or two of the training-cards. For the hundred
yards the training during the final ten days was as follows: _Monday_
and _Tuesday_, sprints (three or four dashes of sixty yards at top
speed); _Wednesday_, a fast 120 yards at the Queen's Club grounds;
_Thursday_, walk; _Friday_, sprints; _Saturday_, 100 yards trial at
Queen's Club; _Sunday_, walk; _Monday_, light work at Queen's Club;
_Tuesday_, easy walk; _Wednesday_, inter-varsity sports. The man for
whom this card was written happened to be over weight and short of
training, or he would have had less track work. If he had been
training for the quarter in addition to the hundred, he would have had
fewer sprints, and, instead of the fast 120, a trial quarter a week
before the sports, with perhaps a fast 200 on the following Friday.
For the mile, the following is a characteristic week's work, ending
with a trial: _Sunday_, walk; _Monday_, one lap (1/3 mile); _Tuesday_,
two laps, fast-ish; _Wednesday_, walk; _Thursday_, easy mile;
_Friday_, walk; _Saturday_, a two lap trial (at the rate of 4.30 for
the mile). For the three miles, the following is a schedule of the
first ten days (the walks are unusually frequent because the "first
string" had a bruise on the ball of his foot): _Monday_, walk;
_Tuesday_, walk; _Wednesday_, two slow laps at the Queen's Club;
_Thursday_, walk; _Friday_, walk; _Saturday_, a long run at the
Queen's Club; _Sunday_, walk; _Monday_, four laps, fast-ish, at the
Queen's Club; _Tuesday_, walk; _Wednesday_, inter-varsity sports. The
chief difference between this work and what we should give in America
is in the matter of walking.
II. CLIMATE AND INTERNATIONAL ATHLETICS
The value of international contests as a basis for comparing English
and American training is impaired by the fact that the visiting team
is pretty sure to be under the weather, as may be indicated by
summarizing the history of international contests. The first
representatives we sent abroad, the Harvard four-oared crew of 1869,
became so overtrained on the Thames on work which would have been only
sufficient at home, that two of the four men had to be substituted.
The substitutes were taken from the "second" crew, which had just come
over from the race at Worcester. The men in this crew had been so
inferior as oarsmen that they had been allowed to compete against Yale
only after vigorous protest; but in the race against Oxford, owing
probably to the brevity of their training in England, the substitutes
pulled the strongest oars in the boat. The crew got off very well, but
when the time came for the final effort, the two original members had
not the nervous stamina to respond.
The experience of the Yale athletes who competed against Oxford in
1894 was much the same. Their performances in the games were so far
below their American form that they won only the events in which they
literally outclassed their opponents--the hammer, shot, and broad
jump. They were sportsmen enough not to explain their poor showing,
and perhaps they never quite realized how the soft and genial English
summer had unnerved them; but several competent observers who had
watched their practice told me that they lost form from day to day.
Their downfall was doubtless aided by the fact that instead of
training at Brighton or elsewhere on the coast, they trained in the
Thames valley and at Oxford.
The experience of the Cornell crew, of which I got full and frank
information while crossing the Atlantic with them after the race, was
along the same lines. Before leaving Ithaca, they rowed over the
equivalent of the Henley course in time that was well under seven
minutes, and not far from the Henley record of six minutes, fifty-one
seconds. At Henley they rowed their first trial in seven minutes and
three seconds, if my memory serves, and in consequence were generally
expected to win. From that day they grew worse and worse. Certain of
the eight went stale and had to be substituted. In the race the crew,
like the earlier Harvard crew, went to pieces when they were called on
for a spurt--the test of nerve force in reserve--and were beaten in
wretchedly slow time. They had gone hopelessly stale on work which
would have been none too much in America.
The experience of the Yale crew in the year after was similar to that
of Harvard and Cornell. The crew went to pieces and lost the race for
the lack of precisely that burst of energy for which American
athletes, and Yale in particular, are remarkable.
Meantime one or two American athletes training at Oxford had been
gathering experience, which, humble though it was, had the merit of
being thorough. Mr. J. L. Bremer, who will be remembered in America as
making a new world's record over the low hurdles, steadily lost
suppleness and energy at Oxford, so that he was beaten in the quarter
mile in time distinctly inferior to his best in America. Clearly, the
effect of the English climate is to relax the nervous system and
thereby to reduce the athlete's power both of sprinting _per se_ and
of spurting at the finish of the race. My own experience in English
training confirmed the conclusion, and pointed to an interesting
extension of it. I was forced to conclude that the first few weeks in
England are more than likely to undo an athlete, and especially for
sprinting; and even if he stays long enough to find himself again, his
ability to sprint is likely to be lessened. In the long run, on the
other hand, the English climate produces staying power in almost the
same proportion as it destroys speed.
When the joint team of track athletes from Yale and Harvard went to
England in 1899, the powers that were took advantage of past
experiences, and instead of going to the Thames valley to train, they
went to Brighton; and instead of doing most of their training in
England, they gave themselves only the few days necessary to get their
shore legs and become acquainted with the Queen's Club track. As a
result, the team was in general up to its normal form, or above it,
and, except for the fact that one of the men was ill, would have won.
The experience of the English athletes who came to America in 1895
points to a similar conclusion. Though the heat was intense and
oppressive and most of the visitors were positively sick, one of the
sprinters, in spite of severe illness, was far above his previous
best, while all of the distance men went quite to pieces. Thus our
climate would seem to reduce the staying power of the English
athletes, and perhaps to increase the speed of sprinters.
It appears on the whole probable that in these international contests
the visiting athlete had best do as much as possible of his training
at home, and it follows that the visiting team is at a distinct and
inevitable disadvantage.
III. AN OXFORD FINAL HONOR SCHOOL
The scope and content of an English honor school is well illustrated
in the following passage from the Oxford examination statutes, which
treats of the final school in English literature. The system will be
seen to be very different from a system under which a student may
receive honors in ignorance of all but a single movement in English
literature.
Sec. 10. _Of the Honour School of English Language and Literature._
1. The Examination in the School of English Language and Literature
shall always include authors or portions of authors belonging to the
different periods of English literature, together with the history of
the English language and the history of English literature.
The Examination shall also include Special Subjects falling within or
usually studied in connexion with the English language and literature.
2. Every Candidate shall be expected to have studied the authors or
portions of authors which he offers (1) with reference to the forms of
the language, (2) as examples of literature, and (3) in their relation
to the history and thought of the period to which they belong.
He shall also be expected to show a competent knowledge (1) of the
chief periods of the English language, including Old English
(Anglo-Saxon), and (2) of the relation of English to the languages
with which it is etymologically connected, and (3) of the history of
English literature, and (4) of the history, especially the social
history, of England during the period of English literature which he
offers.
3. The Examination in Special Subjects may be omitted by Candidates
who do not aim at a place in the First or Second Class.
4. No Candidate shall be admitted to examination in the Final Honour
School of English Language and Literature, unless he has either
obtained Honours in some Final Honour School or has passed the First
Public Examination [_i. e._ Moderation].
5. The Examination shall be under the supervision of a Board of
Studies.
6. It shall be the duty of the Board of Studies in framing
regulations, and also of the Examiners in the conduct of the
Examination, to see that as far as possible equal weight is given to
language and literature: provided always that Candidates who offer
Special Subjects shall be at liberty to choose subjects connected
either with language or with literature or with both.
7. The Board of Studies shall by notice from time to time make
regulations respecting the Examination; and shall have power--
(1) To prescribe authors or portions of authors.
(2) To specify one or more related languages or dialects to be offered
either as a necessary or as an optional part of the Examination.
(3) To name periods of the history of English literature, and to fix
their limits.
(4) To issue lists of Special Subjects in connexion either with
language or with literature or with both, prescribing books or
authorities where they think it desirable.
(5) To prescribe or recommend authors or portions of authors in
languages other than English, to be studied in connexion with Special
Subjects to which they are intimately related.
(6) To determine whether Candidates who aim at a place in the First or
Second Class shall be required to offer more than one Special
Subject.
(_ii_) _Regulations of the Board of Studies for the Examinations in
1901 and 1902._
The subjects of examination in this School are--
I. Portions of English Authors.
II. The History of the English Language.
III. The History of English Literature.
IV. (In the case of those Candidates who aim at a
place in the First or Second Class) a Special Subject of
Language or Literature.
I. ENGLISH AUTHORS.
Candidates will be examined in the following texts:--
_Beowulf._
The texts printed in Sweet's _Anglo-Saxon Reader_.
_King Horn._
_Havelok._
Laurence Minot.
_Sir Gawain and the Green Knight._
Chaucer's _Canterbury Tales_, the _Prologue_ and the following
Tales:--
_The Knight's_, _The Man of Law's_, _The Prioress's_, _Sir
Thopas_, _The Monk's_, _The Nun's Priest's_, _The Pardoner's_,
_The Clerk's_, _The Squire's_, _The Second Nun's_, _The Canon's
Yeoman's_
_Piers Plowman_, the _Prologue_ and first seven _passus_ (text
B).
Shakespeare, with a special study of the following Plays:
_Midsummer Night's Dream_, _King John,_ _Much Ado about
Nothing_, _Macbeth_, _Cymbeline_.
Milton, with a special study of _Paradise Lost_.
These texts are to be studied (1) with reference to the forms of the
language; (2) as examples of literature; and (3) in their relation to
the history and thought of the period to which they belong.
After Milton no special texts are prescribed, but Candidates are
expected to show an adequate knowledge of the chief authors.
II. HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
Candidates will be examined in the Philology and History of the
Language, in Gothic (the Gospel of St. Mark), and in Translation from
Old English and Middle English authors not specially offered.
III. HISTORY OF ENGLISH LITERATURE.
The Examination in the History of English Literature will not be
limited to the prescribed texts. It will include the history of
criticism and of style in prose and verse; for these subjects,
Candidates are recommended to consult the following works:--
Sidney, _Apology for Poetry_.
Daniel, _Defence of Rhyme_.
Dryden, _Essay of Dramatic Poesy_, and _Preface to Fables_.
Addison, Papers on Milton in the _Spectator_.
Pope, _Essay on Criticism_.
Johnson, _Preface to Shakespeare_ and _Lives of the Poets_.
Wordsworth, _Prefaces, etc., to Lyrical Ballads_.
Coleridge, _Biographia Literaria_.
IV. SPECIAL SUBJECTS.
Candidates who aim at a place in the First or Second Class will be
expected to offer a Special Subject, which may be chosen from the
following list:--
1. Old English Language and Literature to 1150 A. D.
2. Middle English Language and Literature, 1150-1400 A. D.
3. Old French Philology, with special reference to Anglo-Norman
French, together with a special study of the following texts:--
Computus of Philippe de Thaun, Voyage of St. Brandan, The Song
of Dermot and the Earl, Les contes moralises de Nicole Bozon.
4. Scandinavian Philology, with special reference to Icelandic,
together with a special study of the following texts:--
Gylfaginning, Laxdaela Saga, Gunnlaugssaga Ormstungu.
5. Elizabethan literature, 1558-1637 A. D.
6. English literature, 1637-1700 A. D.
7. English literature, 1700-1745 A. D.
8. Wordsworth and his contemporaries, 1797-1850 A. D.
9. History of Scottish poetry to 1600 A. D.
Candidates who desire to offer any other subject or period as a
Special Subject must obtain the leave of the Board of Studies a year
before the Examination.
Candidates who offer a period of English Literature will be expected
to show a competent knowledge of the History, especially the Social
History, of England during such period.
The following scheme of papers is contemplated:--
1. Beowulf and other Old English texts.
2. King Horn, Havelok, Minot, Sir Gawain.
3. Chaucer and Piers Plowman.
4. Shakespeare.
5. Milton.
6. History of the language.
7. Gothic--O. E. and M. E. translations.
8. } History of the Literature, including questions
9. } on the history of criticism. Two papers, (1)
to 1700, (2) after 1700.
10. Special Subjects.
The Riverside Press
_Electrotyped and printed by H. O. Houghton & Co._
_Cambridge, Mass., U. S. A._