[21] “Multum proderit si magister non tumultuario ac subito dicat, sed

quæ domi cogitate scripserit.—It will be a great gain if the master does

not speak in a hurry and without forethought, but is ready with what

he has thought out and written out in his own room.”—_Ratio Studd._,

quoted by Schmid. And Sacchini says: “Ante omnia, quæ quisque docturus

est, egregie calleat. Tum enim bene docet, et facile docet, et libenter

docet; bene, quia sine errore; facile, quia sine labore; libenter, quia

ex pleno.... Memoriæ minimum fidat: instauret eam refricetque iterata

lectione antequam quicquam doceat, etiamsi idem sæpe docuerit. Occurret

non raro quod addat vel commodius proponat.—Before all things let

everyone be thoroughly skilled in what he is going to teach; for then

he teaches well, he teaches easily, he teaches readily: well, because

he makes no mistakes; easily, because he has no need to exert himself;

readily, because, like wealthy men he cares not how he gives.... Let him

be very distrustful of his memory; let him renew his remembrance and rub

it up by repeated reading before he teaches anything, though he may have

often taught it before. Something will now and then occur to him which he

may add, or put more neatly.”

[22] In a school (not belonging to the Jesuits) where this plan was

adopted, the boys, by an ingenious contrivance, managed to make it work

very smoothly. The boy who was “hearing” the lessons held the book upside

down in such a way that the others _read_ instead of repeating by heart.

The masters finally interfered with this arrangement.

[23] Since the above was written, an account of these concertations

has appeared in the Rev. G. R. Kingdon’s evidence before the Schools

Commission, 1867 (vol. v, Answers 12, 228 ff.) Mr. Kingdon, the Prefect

of Studies at Stonyhurst, mentions that the side which wins in most

concertations gets an extra half-holiday.

[24] “The grinding over and over of a subject after pupils have attained

a fair knowledge of it, is nothing less than stultifying—killing

out curiosity and the desire of knowledge, and begetting mechanical

habits.”—_Supt. J. Hancock_, Dayton, Ohio. Every teacher of experience

knows how true this is.

[25] “Stude potius ut pauciora clare distincteque percipiant, quam

obscure atque confuse pluribus imbuantur.—Care rather for their seeing a

few things vividly and definitely, than that they should get filled with

hazy and confusing notions of many things.” (There are few more valuable

precepts for the teacher than this.)

[26] Sacchini writes in a very high tone on this subject. The following

passage is striking: “Gravitatem sui muneris summasque opportunitates

assidue animo verset (magister).... ‘Puerilis institutio mundi renovatio

est;’ hæc gymnasia Dei castra sunt, hic bonorum omnium semina latent.

Video solum fundamentumque republicæ quod multi non videant interpositu

terræ.—Let the mind of the master dwell upon the responsibilities of

his office and its immense opportunities.... The education of the young

is the renovation of the world. These schools are the camp of God: in

them lie the seeds of all that is good. There I see the foundation and

ground-work of the commonwealth, which many fail to see from its being

underground.” Perhaps he had read of Trotzendorf’s address to a school,

“Hail reverend divines, learned doctors, worshipful magistrates, &c.”

[27] “Circa illorum valetudinem peculiari cura animadvertat (Rector) ut

et in laboribus mentis modum servent, et in iis quæ ad corpus pertinent,

religiosa commoditate tractentur, ut diutius in studiis perseverare

tam in litteris addiscendis quam in eisdem exercendis ad Dei gloriam

possint.”—_Ratio Studd._, quoted by Schmid. See also _infra_ p. 62.

[28] The following, from the _Ratio Studd._, sounds Jesuitical: “Nec

publicé puniant flagitia quædam secretiora sed privatim; aut si publicé,

_alias obtendant causas_, et satis est eos qui plectuntur conscios esse

causarum.”

[29] As the Public Schools Commission pointed out, the Head Master often

thinks of nothing but the attainment of University honours, _even when

the great majority of his pupils are not going to the University_.

[30] The advantages of learning by heart are twofold, says Sacchini:

“Primum memoriam ipsam perficiunt, quod est in totam ætatem ad universa

negotia inæstimabile commodum. Deinde suppellectilem inde pulcherrimam

congregant verborum ac rerum: quæ item, quamdiu vivant, usui futura sit:

cum quæ ætate illa insederint indelebilia soleant permanere. Magnam

itaque, ubi adoleverint, gratiam Praeceptori habebunt, cui memoriæ

debebunt profectum, magnamque lætitiam capient invenientes quodammodo

domi thesaurum quem, in ætate cæteroqui parum fructuosa, prope non

sentientes parârint. Enim vero quam sæpe viros graves atque præstantes

magnoque jam natu videre et audire est, dum in docta ac nobili corona

jucundissime quædam promunt ex iis quæ pueri condiderunt?—First, they

strengthen the memory itself and so gain an inestimable advantage in

affairs of every kind throughout life. Then they get together by this

means the fairest furniture for the mind, both of thoughts and words, a

stock that will be of use to them as long as they live, since that which

settles in the mind in youth mostly stays there. And when the lads have

grown up they will feel gratitude to the master to whom they are indebted

for their good memory; and they will take delight in finding within them

a treasure which at a time of life otherwise unfruitful they have been

preparing almost without knowing it. How often we see and hear eminent

men far advanced in life, when in learned and noble company, take a

special delight in quoting what they stored up as boys!” The master, he

says, must point out to his pupils the advantages we derive from memory;

that we only know and possess that which we retain, that this cannot

be taken from us, but is with us always and is always ready for use,

a living library, which may be studied even in the dark. Boys should

therefore be encouraged to run over in their minds, or to say aloud,

what they have learnt, as often as opportunity offers, as when they are

walking or are by themselves: “Ita numquam in otio futuros otiosos; ita

minus fore solos cum soli erunt, consuetudine fruentes sapientum....

Denique curandum erit ut selecta quædam ediscant quæ deinde in quovis

studiorum genere ac vita fere omni usui sint futura.—So they will never

be without employment when unemployed, never less alone than when alone,

for then they profit by intercourse with the wise.... To sum up, take

care that they thoroughly commit to memory choice selections which will

for ever after be of use to them in every kind of study, and nearly every

pursuit in life.”—(Cap. viij.) This is interesting and well put, but we

see one or two points in which we have now made an advance. Learning

by heart will give none of the advantages mentioned unless the boys

understand the pieces and delight in them. Learning by heart strengthens,

no doubt, a faculty, but nothing large enough to be called “the memory.”

And the Renascence must indeed have blinded the eyes of the man to whom

childhood and youth seemed an “ætas parum fructuosa”! Similarly, Sturm

speaks of the small fry “qui in extremis latent classibus.” (Quoted by

Parker.) But when Pestalozzi and Froebel came these lay hid no longer.

[31] Ranke, speaking of the success of the Jesuit schools, says: “It was

found that young persons learned more under them in half a year than with

others in two years. Even Protestants called back their children from

distant schools, and put them under the care of the Jesuits.”—_Hist. of

Popes_, book v, p. 138. Kelly’s Trans.

In France, the University in vain procured an _arrêt_ forbidding the

Parisians to send away their sons to the Jesuit colleges: “Jesuit schools

enjoyed the confidence of the public in a degree which placed them beyond

competition.” (Pattison’s _Casaubon_, p. 182.)

Pattison remarks elsewhere that such was the common notion of the

Jesuits’ course of instruction that their controversialists could treat

anyone, even a Casaubon, who had not gone through it, as an uneducated

person.

[32] “Sapientum hoc omnium seu veterum seu recentum constans judicium

est, institutionem puerilem tum fore optimam cum jucundissima

fuerit, inde enim et ludum vocari. Meretur ætatis teneritas ut ne

oneretur: meretur innocentia ut ei parcatur ... Quæ libentibus auribus

instillantur, ad ea velut occurrit animus, avide suscipit, studiose

recondit, fideliter servat.”

[33] “Conciliabit facilè studiis quos primùm sibi conciliârit. Det itaque

omnem operam illorum erga se observantionem ut sapienter colligat et

continenter enutriat. Ostendat, sibi res eorum curæ esse non solum quæ

ad animum sed etiam quæ ad alia pertinent. Gaudeat cum gaudentibus, nec

dedignetur flere cum flentibus. Instar Apostoli inter parvulos parvulus

fiat quo magnos in Christo et magnum in eis Christum efficiat ... Seriam

comitatem et paternam gravitatem cum materna benignitate permisceat.”

Unfortunately, the Jesuits’ kind manner loses its value from being due

not so much to kind feeling as to some ulterior object, or to a rule

of the Order. I think it is Jouvency who recommends that when a boy is

absent from sickness or other sufficient reason, the master should send

daily to inquire after him, _because the parents will be pleased by such

attention_. When the motive of the inquiry is suspected, the parents will

be pleased no longer.

[34] “Errorem existimo statim initio spinosiores quasdam grammaticæ

difficultates inculcare ... cum enim planioribus insueverint difficiliora

paulatim usus explanabit. Quin et capacior subinde mens ac firmius cum

ætate judicium, quod alio monstrante perægre unquam percepisset per sese

non raro intelliget. Exempla quoque talium rerum dum praelegitur autor

facilius in orationis contextu agnoscentur et penetrabunt in animos quam

si solitaria et abscissa proponantur. Quamobrem faciendum erit ut quoties

occurrunt diligenter enucleentur.”

[35] See, _e.g._, marvellous instances of their self-devotion in that

most interesting book, Francis Parkman’s _Jesuits in N. America_ (Boston,

Little & Co., 10th edition, 1876).

[36] I have referred to Francis Parkman, who has chronicled the

marvellous self-devotion and heroism of the Jesuit missionaries in

Canada. Such a witness may be trusted when he says: “The Jesuit was as

often a fanatic for his Order as for his faith; and oftener yet, the two

fanaticisms mingled in him inextricably. Ardently as he burned for the

saving of souls, he would have none saved on the Upper Lakes except by

his brethren and himself. He claimed a monopoly of conversion with its

attendant monopoly of toil, hardships, and martyrdom. Often disinterested

for himself, he was inordinately ambitious for the great corporate power

in which he had merged his own personality; and here lies one of the

causes among many, of the seeming contradictions which abound in the

annals of the Order.”—_The Discovery of the Great West_, by F. Parkman,

London, 1869, p. 28.

[37] In a letter dated from Stonyhurst, 22nd April, 1880.

[38] The best account I have seen of life in a Jesuit school is in

_Erinnerungen eines chemaligen Jesuitenzöglings_ (Leipzig, Brockhaus,

1862). The writer (Köhler?) says that he has become an evangelical

clergyman, but there is no hostile feeling shown to his old instructors,

and the narrative bears the strongest internal evidence of accuracy. Some

of the Jesuit devices mentioned are very ingenious. All house masters who

have adopted the cubicle arrangement of dormitories know how difficult it

is to keep the boys in their own cubicles. The Jesuits have the cubicles

barred across at the top, and the locks on the doors are so constructed

that though they can be opened from the inside _they cannot be shut

again_. The Fathers at Freiburg (in Breisgau) opened a “tuck-shop” for

the boys, and gave “week’s-pay” in counters which passed at their own

shop and nowhere else. The author speaks warmly of the kindness of the

Fathers and of their care for health and recreation. But their ways

were inscrutable and every boy felt himself in the hands of a _human_

providence. As the boys go out for a walk, one of them is detained by the

porter, who says “the Rector wants to speak to you.” On their way back

the boys meet a diligence in which sits their late comrade waving adieus.

_He has been expelled._

Another book which throws much light on Jesuit pedagogy is by a

Jesuit—_La Discipline_, par le R. P. Emmanuel Barbier (Paris, V. Palmé,

2nd edition, 1888). I will give a specimen in a loose translation, as it

may interest the reader to see how carefully the Jesuits have studied the

master’s difficulties. “The master in charge of the boys, especially in

play-time, in his first intercourse with them, has no greater snare in

his way than taking his power for granted, and trusting to the strength

of his will and his knowledge of the world, especially as he is at first

lulled into security by the deferential manner of his pupils.

“That master who goes off with such ease from the very first, to whom the

carrying out of all the rules seems the simplest thing in the world, who

in the very first hour he is with them has already made himself liked,

almost popular, with his pupils, who shows no more anxiety about his work

than he must show to keep his character for good sense, that master is

indeed to be pitied; he is most likely a lost man. He will soon have to

choose one of two things, either to shut his eyes and put up with all

the irregularities he thought he had done away with, or to break with a

past that he would wish forgotten, and engage in open conflict with the

boys who are inclined to set him at defiance. These cases are we trust

rare. But many believe with a kind of rash ignorance and in spite of

the warnings of experience that the good feelings of their pupils will

work together to maintain their authority. They have been told that this

authority should be mild and endeared by acts of kindness. So they set

about crowning the edifice without making sure of the foundations; and

taking the title of authority for its possession they spend all their

efforts in lightening a yoke of which no one really bears the weight.

“In point of fact the first steps often determine the whole course. For

this reason you will attach extreme importance to what I am now going to

advise:

“The chief characteristic in your conduct towards the boys during the

first few weeks should be _an extreme reserve_. However far you go in

this, you can hardly overdo it. So your first attitude is clearly defined.

“You have everything to observe, the individual character of each boy and

the general tendencies and feelings of the whole body. But be sure of one

thing, viz., that _you_ are observed also, and a careful study is made

both of your strong points and of your weak. Your way of speaking and

of giving orders, the tone of your voice, your gestures, disclose your

character, your tastes, your failings, to a hundred boys on the alert to

pounce upon them. One is summed up long before one has the least notion

of it. Try then to remain impenetrable. You should never give up your

reserve till you are master of the situation.

“For the rest, let there be no affectation about you. Don’t attempt

to put on a severe manner; answer politely and simply your pupils’

questions, but let it be in few words, and _avoid conversation_. All

depends on that. Let there be no chatting with them in these early days.

You cannot be too cautious in this respect. Boys have such a polite, such

a taking way with them in drawing out information about your impressions,

your tastes, your antecedents; don’t attempt the diplomate; don’t

match your skill against theirs. You cannot chat without coming out of

your shell, so to speak. Instead of this, you must puzzle them by your

reserve, and drive them to this admission: ‘We don’t know what to make of

our new master.’

“Do I advise you then to be on the defensive throughout the whole year

and like a stranger among your pupils? No! a thousand times, No! It is

just to make their relations with you simple, confiding, I might say

cordial, without the least danger to your authority, that I endeavour

to raise this authority at first beyond the reach of assault.”—_La

Discipline_, chap, v, pp. 31 ff.

In this book we see the best side of the Jesuits. They believe in their

“mission,” and this belief throws light on many things. Those who hate

the Jesuits have often extolled the wisdom of Montaigne, when he says:

“We have not to train up a soul, nor yet a body, but a man; and we cannot

divide him.” Can they see no wisdom in _this_? “Let your mind be filled

with the thought that both soul and body have been created by the Hand of

God: we must account to Him for these two parts of our being; and we are

not required to weaken one of them out of love for the Creator. We should

love the body in the same degree that He could love it.” This is what

Loyola wrote in 1548 to Francis Borgia (Compayré, _Doctrines, &c._, vol.

j, 179). But if we wish to see the other side of the Jesuit character,

we have only to look at the Jesuit as a controversialist. We sometimes

see children hiding things and then having a pretence hunt for them. The

Jesuits are no children, but in arguing they pretend to be searching

for conclusions which are settled before arguments are thought of. See,

_e.g._, the attack on the Port Royalists in _Les Jésuites Instituteurs_,

par le P. Ch. Daniel, 1880, in which the Jesuit sets himself to maintain

this thesis: “D’une source aussi profondément infectée du poison de

l’hérésie, il ne pouvait sortir rien d’absolument bon” (p. 123). One good

point he certainly makes, and in my judgment one only, in comparing the

Port Royalist schools with the schools of Jesuits. Methods which answer

with very small numbers may not do with large numbers: “You might as well

try to extend your gardening operations to agriculture” (p. 102).

[39] I am sorry to use a German word, but educational matters have been

so little considered among us that we have no English vocabulary for

them. The want of a word for _Realien_ was felt over 200 years ago.

“Repositories for _visibles_ shall be prepared by which from beholding

the things gentlewomen may learn the names, natures, values, and use

of herbs, shrubs, trees, mineral-juices (_sic_), metals, and stones.”

(_Essay to Revive the Antient Education of Gentlewomen._ London, 1672.)

[40] See the very interesting _Essay on Montaigne_ by Dean R. W. Church.

[41] Perhaps the saying of Montaigne’s which is most frequently quoted

is the paradox _Savoir par cœur n’est pas savoir_: (“to know by heart is

not to _know_.”) But these words are often misunderstood. The meaning, as

I take it, is this: When a thought has entered into the mind it shakes

off the words by which it was conveyed thither. Therefore so long as the

words are indispensable the thought is not known. Knowing and knowing by

heart are not necessarily opposed, but they are different things; and as

the mind most easily runs along sequences of words a knowledge of the

words often conceals ignorance or neglect of the thought. I once asked a

boy if he thought of the meaning when he repeated Latin poetry and I got

the instructive answer: “Sometimes, _when I am not sure of the words_.”

But there are cases in which we naturally connect a particular form of

words with thoughts that have become part of our minds. We then know, and

know by heart also.

[42] Lord Armstrong has perhaps never read Montaigne’s _Essay on

Pedantry_; certainly, he has not borrowed from it; and yet much that

he says in discussing “The Cry for Useless Knowledge” (_Nineteenth

Century Magazine_, November, 1888), is just what Montaigne said more

than three centuries ago. “The aphorism that knowledge is power is so

constantly used by educational enthusiasts that it may almost be regarded

as the motto of the party. But the first essential of a motto is that

it be true, and it is certainly not true that knowledge is the same as

power, seeing that it is only an aid to power. The power of a surgeon

to amputate a limb no more lies in his knowledge than in his knife. In

fact, the knife has the better claim to potency of the two, for a man

may hack off a limb with his knife alone, but not with his knowledge

alone. Knowledge is not even an aid to power in all cases, seeing that

useless knowledge, which is no uncommon article in our popular schools,

has no relation to power. The true source of power is the originative

action of the mind which we see exhibited in the daily incidents of

life, as well as in matters of great importance.... A man’s success in

life depends incomparably more upon his capacities for useful action

than upon his acquirements in knowledge, and the education of the young

should therefore be directed to the development of faculties and valuable

qualities rather than to the acquisition of knowledge.... Men of capacity

and possessing qualities for useful action are at a premium all over the

world, while men of mere education are at a deplorable discount.” (p.

664).

“There is a great tendency in the scholastic world to underrate the value

and potency of self-education, which commences on leaving school and

endures all through life.” (p. 667).

“I deprecate plunging into doubtful and costly schemes of instruction,

led on by the _ignis fatuus_ that ‘knowledge is a power.’ For where

natural capacity is wasted in attaining knowledge, it would be truer to

say that knowledge is weakness.” (p. 668).

[43] In another matter, also, we find that the masters of these schools

subsequently departed widely from the intention of the great men who

fostered the revival of learning. Wolsey writes: “Imprimis hoc unum

admonendum censuerimus, ut neque plagis severioribus neque vultuosis

minis, aut ulla tyrannidis specie, tenera pubes afficiatur: hac enim

injuria ingenii alacritas aut extingui aut magna ex parte obtundi solet.”

Again he says: “In ipsis studiis sic voluptas est intermiscenda ut puer

ludum potius discendi quam laborem existimet.” He adds: “Cavendum erit ne

immodica contentione ingenia discentium obruantur aut lectione prolonga

defatigentur; utraque enim juxta offenditur.”

[44] Professor Arber is one of the very few editors who give accurate and

sufficient bibliographical information about the books they edit. All

students of our old literature are under deep obligations to him.

[45] Mayor’s is beautifully printed and costs 1_s._ (London, Bell and

Sons.)

[46] “Utile imprimis ut multi præcipiunt, vel ex Græco in Latinum vel

ex Latino vertere in Græcum; quo genere exercitationis proprietas

splendorque verborum, copia figurarum, vis explicandi, præterea

imitatione optimorum similia inveniendi facultas paratur: simul quæ

legentem fefellissent transferentem fugere non possunt. Intelligentia ex

hoc et judicium acquiritur.”—_Epp._ vii. 9, § 2. So the passage stands in

Pliny. Ascham quotes “_et_ ex Græco in Latinum _et_ ex Latino vertere in

Græcum.” with other variations.

[47] _Teaching of Languages in Schools_, by W. H. Widgery, p. 6.

[48] Much information about our early books, with quotations from some of

them, will be found in Henry Barnard’s _English Pedagogy_, 1st and 2nd

series. Some notice of rare books is given in _Schools, School-books, and

Schoolmasters_, by W. Carew Hazlitt (London, Jarvis, 1888), but in this

work there are strange omissions.

[49] The paging is that of the reprint. It differs slightly from that of

first edition.

Essays on Educational Reformers · 第 35 / 45 段