as the study of English spelling, with its lack of consistency and its strain on the mechanical memory, we see the same educational effects obtained. Memory is the faculty that subordinates the present under the past, and its extensive training develops a habit of mind that holds by what is prescribed, and recoils from the new and untried. In short, the educational curriculum that lays great stress on memorizing produces a class of conservative people. On the other hand, the studies that develop original powers of observation, and especially a scientific mind, devoted to Nature and neglecting human history, produces a radical, not to say revolutionizing, tendency. It must be obvious that true progress demands both tendencies, held in equilibrium.

The study of the wisdom of the race, the acceptance of the heritage of the past life of the race, is essential to save the new generation from repeating all the steps traveled on the way hitherto. This necessitates the grounding of education in a study of the humanities. On the other hand, if this load of prescription is not to be a millstone that crushes out all spontaneity from the rising generation, there must be a counter-movement whose principle is the scientific spirit, approaching the world of Nature and the world of institutions with the free attitude of science and individual investigation, which accepts only the results that can be demonstrated or verified by its own activity, and enjoys therefore a feeling of self-recognition in its acquisitions. In sci

ence, man is doubly active: on the one hand, seizing and inventorying the particular fact or event; on the other hand, subsuming it under a universal principle that involves causal energy and a law of action. The act of subsumption gives the mind special gratification because it feels set free from the limited instance and elevated to the realm of principle, wherein it sees the energy that creates all instances, and contains them all potentially within itself. Hence, the spirit of revolution that is gaining so powerful a hold of society in the most recent times. The spirit of science is contagious, and impels toward complete emancipation from the past. But science has made comparatively little progress in the social and political departments, and, besides this, no one is born with science, nor is it possible for one to attain it in early youth. Hence, it is necessary to retain the prescriptive element in education, and to insist upon implicit obedience to prescribed rule at first. There must be a gradual transition over to self-government and free scientific investigation.

CONCORD, MASS., April, 1886.

W. T. HARRIS.

AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

It was in the library of the University of Bonn, nearly four years ago, as I sat before an alcove of educational works and leisurely examined the admirable histories by Raumer and Karl Schmidt, that the thought and purpose of preparing this work were first conceived. In view of the poverty of our literature in educational history, it seemed to me that such a work, by exhibiting the pedagogical principles, labors, and progress of the past, might be helpful to teachers in America.

The history of education, viewed from the standpoint of the philosophy of history, has been traced in its relations with the social, political, and religious conditions of each country. While the results of French and German scholarship in this field have been utilized, the original sources of information whenever accessible have been consulted. As far as was consistent with the limits of this volume, the great teachers of all ages have

been allowed to speak for themselves-a method that appeared more satisfactory than to paraphrase or epitomize their views.

Avoiding such matters of detail as serve only to confuse and oppress the memory, I have endeavored to present clearly the leading characteristics of each period, and the labors and distinctive principles of prominent educators. Considerable prominence has been given to Comenius, Pestalozzi, Froebel, and other educational reformers, who laid the foundations of the scientific methods now coming into general use. In support or illustration of various statements, recognized authorities have been permitted to speak freely.

In preparing this history my position has been, as I believe, that of conservative progress. While what is valuable in educational theory and practice is to be retained, and novelties are to be subjected to rigid scrutiny, it does not seem wise, in view of the fact that the science of education is yet incomplete, to reject summarily all changes and reforms as unnecessary and hurtful innovations. In the sphere of higher education I have not allied myself to either the humanists or the realists, believing that the truth lies between these two extremes. In every department of education I have been able to discover progress, and it is my confident hope that the agitations of the present will issue in a system more nearly perfect than any yet devised.

I have frequently consulted Paroz's "Histoire

Universelle de la Pédagogie," Dittes's "Geschichte der Erziehung," and Raumer's "Geschichte der Pädago gik"; but my greatest obligation is due to Karl Schmidt's "Geschichte der Pädagogik," which is probably the ablest work that has yet been written on edu cational history. From these works, as well as from other French and German authors, a number of valuable passages have been translated. To President Julius D. Dreher, of Roanoke College, who read this work, both in manuscript and in proof, special acknowl edgments are due for valuable suggestions.

F. V. N. P.

SALEM, VIRGINIA, April 12, 1886.