Herder.
School reorganization.
(c) _The Modern Period._--In the last third of the 18th century two
important movements came into play, the "naturalism" of Rousseau and the
"new humanism." While Rousseau sought his ideal in a form of education
and of culture that was in close accord with nature, the German apostles
of the new humanism were convinced that they had found that ideal
completely realized in the old Greek world. Hence the aim of education
was to make young people thoroughly "Greek," to fill them with the
"Greek" spirit, with courage and keenness in the quest of truth, and
with a devotion to all that was beautiful. The link between the
naturalism of Rousseau and the new humanism is to be found in J.G.
Herder, whose passion for all that is Greek inspires him with almost a
hatred of Latin. The new humanism was a kind of revival of the
Renaissance, which had been retarded by the Reformation in Germany and
by the Counter-Reformation in Italy, or had at least been degraded to
the dull classicism of the schools. The new humanism agreed with the
Renaissance in its unreserved recognition of the old classical world as
a perfect pattern of culture. But, while the Renaissance aimed at
reproducing the Augustan age of _Rome_, the new humanism found its
golden age in _Athens_. The Latin Renaissance in Italy aimed at
recovering and verbally imitating the ancient literature; the Greek
Renaissance in Germany sought inspiration from the creative originality
of Greek literature with a view to producing an original literature in
the German language. The movement had its effect on the schools by
discouraging the old classical routine of verbal imitation, and giving a
new prominence to Greek and to German. The new humanism found a home in
Goettingen (1783) in the days of J.M. Gesner and C.G. Heyne. It was
represented at Leipzig by Gesner's successor, Ernesti (d. 1781); and at
Halle by F.A. Wolf, who in 1783 was appointed professor of education by
Zedlitz, the minister of Frederick the Great. In literature, its leading
names were Winckelmann, Lessing and Voss, and Herder, Goethe and
Schiller. The tide of the new movement had reached its height about
1800. Goethe and Schiller were convinced that the old Greek world was
the highest revelation of humanity; and the universities and schools of
Germany were reorganized in this spirit by F.A. Wolf and his illustrious
pupil, Wilhelm von Humboldt. In 1809-1810 Humboldt was at the head of
the educational section of the Prussian Home Office, and, in the brief
interval of a year and a half, gave to the general system of education
the direction which it followed (with slight exceptions) throughout the
whole century. In 1810 the _examen pro facultate docendi_ first made the
profession of a schoolmaster independent of that of a minister of
religion. The new scheme drawn up by J.W. Suevern recognized four
principal co-ordinated branches of learning: Latin, Greek, German,
mathematics. All four were studied throughout the school, Greek being
begun in the fourth of the nine classes, that corresponding to the
English "third form." The old Latin school had only one main subject,
the study of Latin style (combined with a modicum of Greek). The new
gymnasium aimed at a wider education, in which literature was
represented by Latin, Greek and German, by the side of mathematics and
natural science, history and religion. The uniform employment of the
term _Gymnasium_ for the highest type of a Prussian school dates from
1812. The leaving examination (_Abgangspruefung_), instituted in that
year, required Greek translation at sight, with Greek prose composition,
and ability to speak and to write Latin. In 1818-1840 the leading spirit
on the board of education was Johannes Schulze, and a _complete_ and
comprehensive system of education continued to be the ideal kept in
view. Such an education, however, was found in practice to involve a
prolongation of the years spent at school and a correspondingly later
start in life. It was also attacked on the ground that it led to
"overwork." This attack was partially met by the scheme of 1837.
Schulze's period of prominence in Berlin closely corresponded to that of
Herbart at Koenigsberg (1809-1833) and Goettingen (1833-1841), who
insisted that for boys of eight to twelve there was no better text-book
than the Greek _Odyssey_, and this principle was brought into practice
at Hanover by his distinguished pupil, Ahrens.
The Prussian policy of the next period, beginning with the accession of
Friedrich Wilhelm IV. in 1840, was to lay a new stress on religious
teaching, and to obviate the risk of overwork resulting from the
simultaneous study of all subjects by the encouragement of
specialization in a few. Ludwig Wiese's scheme of 1856 insisted on the
retention of Latin verse as well as Latin prose, and showed less favour
to natural science, but it awakened little enthusiasm, while the attempt
to revive the old humanistic Gymnasium led to a demand for schools of a
more modern type, which issued in the recognition of the _Realgymnasium_
(1859).
In the age of Bismarck, school policy in Prussia had for its aim an
increasing recognition of modern requirements. In 1875 Wiese was
succeeded by Bonitz, the eminent Aristotelian scholar, who in 1849 had
introduced mathematics and natural science into the schools of Austria,
and had substituted the wide reading of classical authors for the
prevalent practice of speaking and writing Latin. By his scheme of 1882
natural science recovered its former position in Prussia, and the hours
assigned in each week to Latin were diminished from 86 to 77. But
neither of the two great parties in the educational world was satisfied;
and great expectations were aroused when the question of reform was
taken up by the German emperor, William II., in 1890. The result of the
conference of December 1890 was a compromise between the conservatism of
a majority of its members and the forward policy of the emperor. The
scheme of 1892 reduced the number of hours assigned to Latin from 77 to
62, and laid special stress on the _German_ essay; but the modern
training given by the _Realgymnasium_ was still unrecognized as an
avenue to a university education. A conference held in June 1900, in
which the speakers included Mommsen and von Wilamowitz, Harnack and
Diels, was followed by the "Kiel Decree" of the 26th of November. In
that decree the emperor urged the equal recognition of the classical and
the modern _Gymnasium_, and emphasized the importance of giving more
time to Latin and to English in both. In the teaching of Greek, "useless
details" were to be set aside, and special care devoted to the connexion
between ancient and modern culture, while, in all subjects, attention
was to be paid to the classic precept: _multum, non multa_.
By the scheme of 1901 the pupils of the _Realgymnasium_, the
_Oberrealschule_ and the _Gymnasium_ were admitted to the university on
equal terms in virtue of their leaving-certificates, but Greek and Latin
were still required for students of classics or divinity.
For the _Gymnasium_ the aim of the new scheme is, in _Latin_, "to supply
boys with a sound basis of grammatical training, with a view to their
understanding the more important classical writers of Rome, and being
thus introduced to the intellectual life and culture of the ancient
world"; and, in _Greek_, "to give them a sufficient knowledge of the
language with a view to their obtaining an acquaintance with some of the
Greek classical works which are distinguished both in matter and in
style, and thus gaining an insight into the intellectual life and
culture of Ancient Greece." In consequence of these changes Greek is now
studied by a smaller number of boys, but with better results, and a new
lease of life has been won for the classical _Gymnasium_.
Lastly, by the side of the classical _Gymnasium_, we now have the
"German Reform Schools" of two different types, that of Altona (dating
from 1878) and that of Frankfort-on-the-Main (1892). The leading
principle in both is the postponement of the time for learning Latin.
Schools of the Frankfort type take French as their only foreign language
in the first three years of the course, and aim at achieving in six
years as much as has been achieved by the _Gymnasia_ in nine; and it is
maintained that, in six years, they succeed in mastering a larger amount
of Latin literature than was attempted a generation ago, even in the
best _Gymnasia_ of the old style. It may be added that in all the German
_Gymnasia_, whether reformed or not, more time is given to classics than
in the corresponding schools in England.
See F. Paulsen, _Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts vom Ausgang des
Mittelalters bis auf die Gegenwart mit besonderer Ruecksicht auf den
klassischen Unterricht_ (2 vols., 2nd ed., 1896); _Das Realgymnasium
und die humanistische Bildung_ (1889); _Die hoeheren Schulen und das
Universitaetsstudium im 20. Jahrhundert_ (1901); "Das moderne
Bildungswesen" in _Die Kulture der Gegenwart_, vol. i. (1904); _Das
deutsche Bildungswesen in seiner geschichtlichen Entwickelung_ (1906)
(with the literature there quoted, pp. 190-192), translated by Dr T.
Lorenz, _German Education, Past and Present_ (1908); T. Ziegler,
_Notwendigkeit ... des Realgymnasiums_ (Stuttgart, 1894); F.A.
Eckstein, _Lateinischer und griechischer Unterricht_ (1887); O. Kohl,
"Griechischer Unterricht" (Langensalza, 1896) in W. Rein's _Handbuch_;
A. Baumeister's _Handbuch_ (1895), especially vol. i. 1 (History) and
i. 2 (Educational Systems); P. Stoetzner, _Das oeffentliche
Unterrichtswesen Deutschlands in der Gegenwart_ (1901); F. Seiler,
_Geschichte des deutschen Unterrichtswesens_ (2 vols., 1906);
_Verhandlungen_ of June 1900 (2nd ed., 1902); _Lehrplaene_, &c. (1901);
_Die Reform des hoeheren Schulwesens_, ed. W. Lexis (1902); A.
Harnack's _Vortrag_ and W. Parow's _Erwiderung_ (1905); H. Mueller,
_Das hoehere Schulwesen Deutschlands am Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts_
(Stuttgart, 1904); O. Steinbart, _Durchfuehrung des preussischen
Schulreform in ganz Deutschland_ (Duisburg, 1904); J. Schipper, _Alte
Bildung und moderne Cultur_ (Vienna, 1901); Papers by M.E. Sadler: (1)
"Problems in Prussian Secondary Education" (Special Reports of
Education Dept., 1899); (2) "The Unrest in Secondary Education in
Germany and Elsewhere" (Special Reports of Board of Education, vol. 9,
1902); J.L. Paton, _The Teaching of Classics in Prussian Secondary
Schools_ (on "German Reform Schools") (1907, Wyman, London); J.E.
Russell, _German Higher Schools_ (New York, 1899); and (among earlier
English publications) Matthew Arnold's _Higher Schools and
Universities in Germany_ (1874, reprinted from _Schools and
Universities on the Continent_, 1865).
United States.
(4) In the _United States of America_ the highest degree of educational
development has been subsequent to the Civil War. The study of Latin
begins in the "high schools," the average age of admission being fifteen
and the normal course extending over four years. Among classical
teachers an increasing number would prefer a longer course extending
over six years for Latin, and at least three for Greek, and some of
these would assign to the elementary school the first two of the
proposed six years of Latin study. Others are content with the late
learning of Latin and prefer that it should be preceded by a thorough
study of modern languages (see Prof. B.I. Wheeler, in Baumeister's
_Handbuch_, 1897, ii. 2, pp. 584-586).
Latin pronunciation.
It was mainly owing to a pamphlet issued in 1871 by Prof. G.M. Lane, of
Harvard, that a reformed pronunciation of Latin was adopted in all the
colleges and schools of the United States. Some misgivings on this
reform found expression in a work on the _Teaching of Latin_, published
by Prof. C.E. Bennett of Cornell in 1901, a year in which it was
estimated that this pronunciation was in use by more than 96% of the
Latin pupils in the secondary schools.
Some important statistics as to the number studying Latin and Greek in
the secondary schools were collected in 1900 by a committee of twelve
educational experts representing all parts of the Union, with a view to
a uniform course of instruction being pursued in all classical schools.
They had the advantage of the co-operation of Dr W.T. Harris, the U.S.
commissioner of education, and they were able to report that, in all the
five groups into which they had divided the states, the number of pupils
pursuing the study of Latin and Greek showed a remarkable advance,
especially in the most progressive states of the middle west. The number
learning Latin had increased from 100,144 in 1890 to 314,856 in
1899-1900, and those learning Greek from 12,869 to 24,869. Thus the
number learning Latin at the later date was three times, and the number
learning Greek twice, as many as those learning Latin or Greek ten years
previously. But the total number in 1000 was 630,048; so that,
notwithstanding this proof of progress, the number learning Greek in
1900 was only about one twenty-fifth of the total number, while the
number learning Latin was as high as half.
The position of Greek as an "elective" or "optional" subject (notably at
Harvard), an arrangement regarded with approval by some eminent
educational authorities and with regret by others, probably has some
effect on the high schools in the small number of those who learn Greek,
and in their lower rate of increase, as compared with those who learn
Latin. Some evidence as to the quality of the study of those languages
in the schools is supplied by English commissioners in the _Reports of
the Mosely Commission_. Thus Mr Papillon considered that, while the
teaching of English literature was admirable, the average standard of
Latin and Greek teaching and attainment in the upper classes was "below
that of an English public school"; he felt, however, that the secondary
schools of the United States had a "greater variety of the curriculum to
suit the practical needs of life," and that they existed, not "for the
select few," but "for the whole people" (pp. 250 f.).
For full information see the "Two volumes of Monographs prepared for
the United States Educational Exhibit at the Paris Exposition of
1900," edited by Dr N. Murray Butler; the _Annual Reports_ of the U.S.
commissioner of education (Washington); and the _Reports of the Mosely
Commission to the United States of America_ (London, 1904). Cf.
statistics quoted in G.G. Ramsay's "Address on Efficiency in
Education" (Glasgow, 1902, 17-20), from the _Transactions of the Amer.
Philol. Association_, xxx. (1899), pp. lxxvii-cxxii; also Bennett and
Bristol, _The Teaching of Latin and Greek in the Secondary School_
(New York, 1901). (J. E. S.*)