The History Teacher's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 3, November, 1909

---

---

---

---

The History Teacher’s Magazine

BY DONALD E. SMITH, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.

There are few persons who will question the importance of a liberal use of good maps as a supplement to and even a part of the teaching of history in high schools and colleges, and there are few teachers who are not perplexed by the difficulties in the selection and use of these essential aids to the teaching of their subject. Owing to the considerable cost of this kind of apparatus there is bound to be the ever-present financial difficulty. Owing to the great number of publications purporting to meet the needs of the history teacher, from small outline maps costing less than a cent apiece to elaborate atlases costing fifty dollars, there is a great range of choice within which there is no little difficulty in deciding just what cartographical aids are best for the problem at hand. As the financial question is always dependent upon local and particular considerations, and as the actual handling of maps is a subject in itself large enough for a separate article, I will limit myself to the matter of the selection of the best maps.

It is assumed, of course, that a selection has to be made. There are few institutions wealthy enough to buy indiscriminately everything offered for sale, and even were that generally true, an indiscriminate use of good and bad materials could not be countenanced anyway. The question is then, what are the most useful maps that may be made available for schools with but limited means at their disposal.

The great merit of a wall map consists in its size, which makes possible the depicting on a large scale of the things which can be represented upon a map, with the further capital advantage that such a map can be seen by a great many people at the same time. Its superiority over the atlas lies then, not in accuracy, or wealth of detail, but in its visibility. For this there is absolutely no substitute; and this advantage, which for the teacher is almost the only one, secures for the wall map a place among the indispensables in classroom equipment. They can be made to represent anything that any map can, though their special province is the exhibition of general facts where minute details are negligible. In fact, the encumbering of a large map with a multitude of names and other data is the cardinal sin of the cartographer. The two broad classes of facts put upon maps are political and physical, and almost always in combination, as neither one has very much meaning without the other. Let us take up the physical maps first, as they offer the greatest difficulties, are the most expensive, and in consequence, are most rarely found of a satisfactory character.

The trouble with a physical map is that it has the impossible task of showing physical features as they are and so that they can be seen. This is impossible, because if things are shown in their right proportions, and if such natural features as rivers and mountains were drawn true to scale they would appear in most cases as nothing more than faint lines and specks upon the map. As it is absolutely necessary that they be seen clearly at some distance, a gross exaggeration of their apparent size is made necessary. These difficulties are successfully compromised in a series well known in the United States, published by the house of Perthes, and known as the Sydow-Habenicht series. In their color scheme, omission of unnecessary details and general mechanical excellence, they are so satisfactory that they have come to be something like the standard maps for the continents. Their great English competitor is Stanford’s new series of orographical school maps, compiled under the direction of the well-known writer, H. J. Mackinder. Of an equally high character and worked out with somewhat greater elaboration of details are some of the maps of W. & A. K. Johnston, and the series of physical maps published in America by the Rand-McNally Company. Before leaving the subject of physical wall maps, I want to say a word of commendation of the maps of Dietrich Reimer, of Berlin, prepared by Richard Kiepert. The classical maps of Henry Kiepert, published by the same house, are seen in nearly every high school in the country, but the work of Richard Kiepert is altogether too little known. Owing to the influence of mere personal taste one should be very cautious about stating their preferences too confidently while attempting to discriminate between a number of different types of maps, all of which are excellent, but I feel bound to state that I regard Richard Kiepert’s map of Central Europe as representing the great desideratum of map-making. The essential physiographic features of that most intricate region, including the primary and secondary axes of the continent, are exhibited with such clearness that it is possible to use this map before a large class in a college or university lecture course. For all ordinary purposes of the high school, the Sydow-Habenicht map of Europe is sufficient, and as it is the map of the whole continent, the geographical relationships of Europe and Africa and Europe and Asia are shown, as, of course, they cannot be with the Kiepert map, but no college class should be denied the privilege of seeing the Kiepert map or its equivalent, and if there is an equivalent I am not acquainted with it. Some of the maps of the French houses of Delagrave and Hachette & Company are deserving of wider use in this country, but our dependence on English and German publications, for commercial reasons; is not likely to be diminished for several years to come. These French firms apparently make little effort to advertise their wares in the United States, so that the difficulty of keeping track of their latest works and ordering them when they are known, constitutes a serious obstacle to their general use.

The second grand division of wall maps is made up of those which attempt primarily to show forth political divisions. They fall naturally into two further divisions; first, political maps of modern countries as they are at the present time, and second, historical maps which represent political divisions of the earth as they were at different times in the past. The most accurate maps of the first class are, generally speaking, published by the various governments of the civilized world, particularly of those military nations whose general staffs have, from the necessities of scientific warfare, been driven to preparing as accurate representations of the surface of the earth as is humanly possible. Of course, such maps record the minutest topographical details, and to that extent are physical in character, but for that matter, purely political maps in the sense of totally ignoring all physical features, are becoming, happily, almost unknown. All a political map is, then, is a map which pays relatively more attention to the human side of geography than to the physical, and so, as it were, looks at the face of the continent from the point of view of man rather than nature.

There are good maps of the first subdivision almost without number, and they are well known by people other than specialists. Those published in England and America by such houses as Rand-McNally, W. & A. K. Johnston, George Philip & Son, and Edward Stanford may serve as good examples. They are quite adequate for the English speaking world and are known to schoolmen throughout this country.

The subject of historical maps, the second subdivision in the classification made above, cannot be dismissed quite so easily, and the treatment of this topic should not be relegated to the end of a short article on maps in general. In this field of cartography, England and America are distinctly behind the peoples of the continent of Europe, so that for maps illustrating historical geography recourse must be had to foreign productions, particularly those of Germany. Without any attempt to make comparisons, I must content myself with the bare statement that the two series, Henry Kiepert for the ancient period, and Spruner-Bretschneider for the medieval and modern period, cover the field of European and Oriental history very satisfactorily for college classes. The fact that in the first series all names are in Latin, and in the second all names are in German, make these maps unsatisfactory for general use in the high schools. In lieu of these products of the firms of Reimer, in Berlin, and Perthes, in Gotha, there are used very generally and with satisfaction the cheaper and cruder historical charts of MacCoun. The color scheme in these charts is distinctive if not beautiful, while the few minor inaccuracies are too unimportant to affect the general usefulness of the series.

There is no space left for even touching upon the subject of economic, commercial, and ethnographic maps; upon the arrangement, suspension, and classification of the map collection in any given school or department of a university; or upon the all-important topic of atlases, a whole subject in itself, closely related to the subject of wall maps, and even more difficult to handle properly. But these and other matters, such as the actual handling of maps before classes, and the treatment of the geographical factors in history, though closely associated with the subject of wall maps, are not within the scope of this article. I shall be content if the references given here to particular maps prove specific enough to give practical aid to the history teacher in building up the map equipment of his department.

---

REVIEW OF DR. JAMESON’S RECENT ARTICLE.

A noteworthy article upon the origin of the American Historical Association and its history during the past twenty-five years appears in the October number of “The American Historical Review.” The author, Dr. J. Franklin Jameson, is better fitted than any other man in the country to treat this subject, and he gives us the early history of the association with a genial sympathy that enlists one’s interest at once.

Prefacing his remarks with the statement that “no agency has been so potent in the advancement of American historical scholarship” as the association, Dr. Jameson points out the conditions of historical research and pedagogy in the year 1884, in which the association was founded. There was but one general historical journal. In all the universities and colleges of the country there were apparently only fifteen professors and five assistant professors who gave all their time to history. The subject was in many cases subordinated or annexed to other topics, including political science, English literature, geology, German and French. Yet, despite the small numbers of those engaged in teaching history, Dr. Jameson points out that there were giants in those days, men who were trained when the German system of history teaching was at its best, or who, like the great national literary historians, had advanced far in their labors.

The specific details of the organization of the association at Saratoga, September 10, 1884 will be of much interest to the younger history workers. With kindliness for diverging views, Dr. Jameson shows how early in the life of the association problems arose, the successful settlement of which had much to do with the future of the organization. Should the association be a small one, made up of forty or more “Immortals,” or should the appeal be made to a wider constituency, and all interested in history be invited to join? Should the association accept incorporation by the nation and government aid in its work? Should the meetings be held continuously in Washington? Should the annual meetings with the papers read at such meetings be the sole form of activity entered into by the association?

The solution of these and other questions, Dr. Jameson points out, giving credit in passing to the past and present workers in the association. He names particularly as steps in advance the gaining of a charter from the national government, and incidentally the placing of the papers of the association in the hands of the government for publication.

Taking the year 1895 as a critical point, he shows that the association had $8,000 in its treasury and current expenses of not over forty per cent. of its income, and yet that its work did not seem to prosper. From that year, however, the adoption of a new policy broadened the activities of the association. The support of the association was given to “The American Historical Review”; the American Society of Church History was affiliated with the main organization: a Committee of Seven on the Teaching of History in Secondary Schools was appointed, and several years afterwards made its famous report.

Later activities have been added from time to time; a Standing Committee on Bibliography, the Historical Manuscripts Commission, the Public Archives Commission, the establishment of prizes for original work in history, the start of the publication of a series of volumes of “Original Narratives of Early American History,” the formation of a Pacific Coast branch, the appointment of a Committee of Eight on the Teaching of History in Elementary Schools, which has but lately reported, and the coöperation with a British committee to prepare a select bibliography of modern English history.

While the field of activities of the association has thus expanded, the membership of the association has grown until now it stands at about twenty-five hundred. Its funds amount to $26,000. It has a revenue of $8,000 a year, and the government prints for it material which represents an outlay for printing of about $7,000.

Dr. Jameson closes his article with the statement: “Probably no historical society in the world is more numerous; it might perhaps be successfully maintained that none is more extensively useful. If the quality of all that it does is not yet of ideal excellence, it may be that its work is done as well as can be expected from an organization no member of which can give to its concerns more than a minor portion of his time. At all events, it has played an effective part in the historical progress of the last twenty-five years, and none of those who took part in its foundation at Saratoga, in that now remote September, need feel regret at his share in the transaction. That it may flourish abundantly in the future must be the wish of all who care for the interests ‘of American history and of history in America.’”

---

BY CHARLES A. BEARD, ADJUNCT PROFESSOR OF POLITICS IN COLUMBUS UNIVERSITY.

What Dr. Stubbs said many years ago about the difficulty of mastering the history of institutions applies with equal force to the mastery of present institutions, especially in actual operation. Perhaps, in a way, the student of government is more fortunately situated than the student of history, for he can use the laboratory method to some extent. He may attend primaries and caucuses, visit the State capital or the City Hall, take a place among the spectators in a police court watching the daily grind, or observe the selectman, perhaps a drug clerk, superintend the construction of a town highway. But in the class-room instruction in government and politics must perforce deal largely with abstractions. The historians, long ago recognizing the vice of unreality which attended them like a ghost that would not be downed, cast about for some new method that would give more firmness and life to their instruction. In their search they came upon the sources, and instead of listening always to the voice of Green or Stubbs, they stopped to hear the voices of the kings, monks, warriors and lawyers who helped to make the history of which Green and Stubbs wrote. The result, as all the world knows, has been marvelous. It has brought more vividness and solidity to historical instruction. It has done more. The very method itself, in the hands of skilled workers, has become a discipline of the highest value. Whoever doubts it should read Professor Fling’s article in the first issue of this magazine. Lawyers likewise have discovered the same difficulties which the teachers of history encountered, and, flinging away Blackstone and the text-books, they have sought refuge in the sources alone. Perhaps they have gone too far with the “case system”; in fact, a reaction seems imminent at this moment; but the commentators will never recover their former sway.

Strange to say, teachers of government and politics have not yet made any widespread use of the methods that have been found so effective in the hands of other students of institutions, and yet in quantity, variety and interest the sources available for their work are practically unlimited. One of the most important groups of materials, the government publications, can be had for the asking; and our waste baskets are filled with the examples of another group, the fugitive literature of party politics. Acres of diamonds have been at our door, but our instruction in government and politics wears, in general, such a barren aspect that keen-sighted students are aware of its unreality and, slow-switted ones find no delight or profit in it. No word in our curriculum suggests such innocuous futility as “civics,” and yet we are preparing citizens for service in a democracy!

But to turn from preachments to some practical advice, which, I take it, is what the editor wanted when he asked me to do this article. The source materials for government and politics fall readily into four groups.

I. There are, first, the autobiographies, memoirs and writings of statesmen, lawyers, legislators, judges, street-cleaning commissioners, police superintendents, and other persons who have actually conducted some branch of our government. These books, it is true, are often written to glorify the authors; but the solemn presentation of the unvarnished truth was not always the purpose of the medieval monk whose chronicle is studied with such zeal as a source. What could be more charming or illuminating than Senator Hoar’s memoirs, Sherman’s recollections, Blaine’s story of his service in Congress, or Benton’s view of things? Were there space at my disposal I could fill this magazine with the topics on which I have secured informing notes from Hoar’s work. There are wit, and humor, and reality on almost every page. I suspect, and whisper it here under breath, that a student who reads it will know more about the Federal Government than one who devotes his time to memorizing the sacred Constitution, so prayerfully drafted by the Fathers.

II. In the second group I would place the government publications, State and Federal and municipal. Now I am aware that this calls up in the minds of many readers visions of the long rows of repulsive volumes which cumber our library shelves, and I know that government reports all look alike to careless observers. They are not, however. Even the “Congressional Record” has pages glistening with information on the inner workings of Congress and the play of interests in lawmaking. It takes some courage for the busy teacher to start on that formidable monument to the capacity of the Government Printing Office, but, as Professor Reinsch has pointed out in the preface to his splendid collection of materials on the Federal Government, the process of studying the sources while irksome at the beginning soon has the exhilarating effect on the mind that brisk physical exercise has on the body. Only one who has turned from a vest-pocket manual of predigested “civics” to the apparently cold and barren waste of the “Congressional Record” can know the exhilaration of the experiment. In the debates of the conventions in which our State Constitutions are framed we can find materials which will illuminate every part of our commonwealth government. Then there are the executive messages and inaugurals—voluminous and forbidding, but even a few hours over them with pen in hand and a plentiful supply of page markers will yield fruit never dreamed of by the teacher who has exhausted his ingenuity on inventing a table that will show graphically what powers are coordinate, exclusive, and reserved in our constitutional system! Then there are the departmental reports; I have a shelf full for the years 1908-09, just in front of my working table. They give a lot of precise information on the state of the civil service, the organization of the army and navy, the work of the Bureau of Corporations, the investigations of the Department of Labor, and the like, which I must have to give correctness and precision to my instruction in matters of State and Federal administration. Then they are indispensable for reference. I am constantly having trouble in remembering whether the pension bureau is a bureau or a division, or is in the War Department, where it would seem to belong, or in the Department of Commerce and Labor, or somewhere else. It really does not matter so much, for doubtless most of our best citizens do not know where it is, especially since, under our system of indirect taxation, they don’t feel its hands in their pockets. Finally, there are Supreme Court decisions. Here laymen must beware, for the lawyers have forbidden us to come in; only one who has mastered the mysteries of real property and torts, so they would have us believe, can understand the mysteries of direct taxation as defined by the Supreme Court of the United States. Now, we must not take the lawyers too seriously, but we must master the elements of law and also learn how to get the “point” of a case, discover the facts and separate the necessary reasoning from the obiter. Certainly, no student of American government has any business teaching the subject unless he has read and understood many of the greatest decisions of the august tribunal that presides over our political destinies.

III. A third group of materials embraces State and Federal laws. How many readers of this article have ever seen in one spot the yearly output of his State legislature or Congress? How many readers who have discussed Congressional appropriations have ever seen an appropriation bill or part of one? How many readers who have discussed tariff and finance have ever seen a real live tariff bill reposing in the pages of the statutes of the United States? I always take Ash’s edition of the charter of New York City—a portly volume of about a thousand pages—into my class room and perform before the eyes of the students the experiment of running through the chief titles. It helps to keep them modest in their estimate of their knowledge of our city government, and it is a standing apology for the innumerable question which I fail to answer. I may mention, also, in leaving this group, the State election law which can be secured readily from the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and should be always in hand.

IV. The fourth group includes the literature of current and party politics, vast, fugitive, here to-day and gone to-morrow, but of an importance never imagined by students who have staked their hopes on understanding our system by a study of “The Federalist.” Party platforms, national, State, and local, campaign text-books, campaign speeches; broadsides, cartoons, posters, and handbills; pamphlets published by partisan and non-partisan associations; interviews in the press; articles in magazines, and a thousand other devices by which political issues are raised and public consciousness aroused, ought to be watched with close scrutiny by the teacher of government faithful to his calling. A collection of ballots should be made showing what the voter has to do on election day, and copies of instructions to voters should be filed away. A hundred other things will be suggested at once to the alert teacher, so that I need not continue the catalogue, but will close the general appeal “Back to the Sources.”

---

BY JOHN HAYNES, PH.D.

For years the history of Turkey was a monotonous tale of domestic disorder and foreign intervention. There was endless turmoil among the warring races and religions of Macedonia, and from time to time some dreadful outrage against the Armenians of Asiatic Turkey. The nations of Europe were constantly seeking reparation for wrongs done to their citizens or urging reforms for the benefit of the Sultan’s Christian subjects. It seemed only a question of time when Turkey would be blotted from the map by the powers of Europe.

Suddenly in July, 1908, it was announced that the constitution of 1876, which was “suspended” after being in force a short time, had been restored. Only the party known as the Young Turks were prepared for such an occurrence. For thirty years they had labored for the overthrow of the misrule of Sultan Abdul Hamid II. Their headquarters had been in Paris, but since 1904 they had been forming revolutionary organizations in Turkey under a central body called the Committee of Union and Progress. The support of the movement came from the professional classes and from progressive officers in the army, without whose help it could not have succeeded. Some days before the proclamation of the constitution, the Sultan learned of disaffection in the army of European Turkey, and vainly tried to quell it. Then being informed that unless he granted a constitution thirty thousand soldiers would march upon Constantinople, he yielded. A new ministry was formed under Kiamil Pasha, and many of the tools of the Sultan fled the country. In many cities there were extravagant manifestations of rejoicing, in which Moslems and Christians participated together.

The constitution of 1876 is the work of Midhat Pasha, the first Grand Vizier of Abdul Hamid. It provides for personal liberty, freedom of speech and of the press, and equality of Moslems and Christians before the law. The Parliament consists of a Senate, whose members are appointed by the Sultan, and a Chamber of Deputies chosen by the people indirectly through electors. Under this constitution a parliament was chosen and opened in December by the Sultan in person.

For a time all seemed to go well, but Abdul Hamid was plotting for the overthrow of the new régimé which had been forced upon him. The first sign of this was the appointment of two ministers suspected of being hostile to the progressive program. The Chamber of Deputies voted want of confidence in the ministry, and Hilmi Pasha was made Grand Vizier in accordance with the wish of the Young Turks, who thus imposed a new ministry upon the sovereign after the manner of the British House of Commons. But this did not end the matter. For months the Sultan’s money had been corrupting the army, and in April, 1909, the troops in Constantinople mutinied, declaring the Young Turks tyrants. Tewfik Pasha, a reactionary, was put at the head of the ministry. At the same time terrible massacres of Christians, believed to have been inspired by the Sultan, took place in Adana and vicinity.

But this counter-revolution was short-lived. The Macedonian division of the army under Chevket Pasha soon marched upon Constantinople, took the city without serious opposition, occupied the royal palace (Yiediz Kiosk), and made the Sultan a prisoner. Abdul Hamid was formally deposed by decree of the Sheik-ul-Islam, the religious head of the Moslems, and the action was confirmed by the Parliament. A brother, who by Turkish law, was the heir apparent, was chosen in his place, and now rules as Mehmet V. Hilmi Pasha was restored as Grand Vizier. Many participants in the counter revolution were executed. The new Sultan, who was sixty-four at his accession, has lived the secluded life of a political prisoner.

The future of Turkey is almost as much a problem as it was before this remarkable revolution. The Young Turks, who are now in power, stand for internal reform and the integrity of the empire. But they have to face the fact that the great majority of Moslems are reactionary, and that their power is dependent on the support of the army. The people as a whole are not fitted for self-government. One of the charges brought against Abdul Hamid was that the Turkish dominions were dismembered during his reign, but since the revolution of July, 1908, Turkey has lost its nominal sovereignty over Bulgaria and Bosnia and Herzegovina. She has also been on the point of losing her small hold on Crete. Though there are Christians in the Parliament and two in the cabinet, the Young Turks do not have the complete co-operation of the Christian population, many of whom will never be satisfied while any of Europe remains under Turkish rule. Besides, their sincerity as protectors of the Christians is doubted. The action of the court martial on the Adana massacres is not satisfactory. Few Moslems have been severely dealt with. Scores of Christian girls, who were carried away as booty during the massacres, have not been returned to their families nor their captors punished. The Patriarch of the Armenian Catholic Church declares that the Young Turks propose to make the Christians give up their educational institutions and send their children to Turkish schools. The greater part of the foreigners resident at Constantinople, while sympathetic with the new order, are not confident of the future. On the other hand, there are persons thoroughly conversant with Turkish affairs who feel sure that a new day of freedom and progress has really dawned. The future only can tell.

---

A RESTATEMENT BY JAMES ALTON JAMES, OF NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE.

Teachers of history, the country over, have for the past ten years been grateful that the American Historical Association assumed that history for the secondary schools offered problems in which its members were vitally interested. In all of our schools to-day some effect of the revolution wrought by the report of the Committee of Seven may be observed. It was not going far afield, then, when the same association, observing the heterogeneous condition existing also in the presentation of history in the elementary schools, should have proffered some assistance. At the Chicago meeting of the association, therefore, teachers of history from elementary and high schools, from normal schools and colleges, were invited to a conference on the topics: (1) Some suggestions for a course of study in history for the elementary schools; and (2) the preparation most desirable for the teacher of history in these schools. Following the discussion, the resolution was adopted that it was deemed desirable that a committee should be appointed to make out a program in history for the elementary schools and consider other closely-allied topics. In response, the Committee of Eight was selected to consider the problems suggested and prepare a report. Care was exercised in making up the committee to secure a majority who should be in actual touch with the work of the elementary schools. As originally composed, the committee consisted of three superintendents of schools, two teachers in normal schools, and two from the colleges. It cannot be said, therefore, that the report finally presented after four years of labor is the result of the working out of fine-drawn theories on the part of college men.

In fashioning the report, present conditions were kept steadily in mind. Looking towards some uniformity in the program for history in our elementary schools, due praise must always be accorded to the report of the Madison Conference on History, Civil Government and Economics, which was published in 1893, and to the supplementary report of the Committee of Seven. In these reports we find the first significant declarations that history is entitled to a place of dignity in all secondary and elementary school programs. Some two hundred superintendents of schools in different parts of the country have submitted for the consideration of the committee what they believed to be the best programs, and many elementary history teachers have been consulted on various features of the report. Opportunity for discussing the most important phases was given in a number of teachers’ associations in various sections of the country. Through these letters and discussions the committee has obtained many practical suggestions.

The committee has attempted to present a plan of study which would bring about concerted endeavor, avoid duplication of work in the several grades, and produce unity of purpose. To this end, our fundamental proposition is, that history teaching in the elementary schools should be focused around American history. By this we do not mean to imply that American history has to do with events, alone, which have occurred in America. The object is to explain the civilization, the institutions, and the traditions of the America of to-day. America cannot be understood without taking into account the history of its various peoples before they crossed the Atlantic. Indeed, too much emphasis has heretofore been laid upon the Atlantic as a natural boundary not merely of the American continent, but also of the history of America.

The grouping of the subject matter for the several grades is as follows: In the first two grades, the object is to give the child an impression of primitive life and an appreciation of public holidays. To the succeeding three grades is assigned the study of great leaders and heroes; world heroes in the third; American explorers and leaders in America to the period of the Revolution in the fourth; and leaders of the national period in the fifth. In addition, there should be noted the manners, customs, and, so far as possible, the industries of the various sections of the country at the period under discussion.

The sixth grade, as outlined, will at first glance present the greatest difficulties. With full appreciation of this tendency, the committee has carefully and at greater length than for the other grades, defined its position. It is recommended that there should be presented to pupils of this grade those features of ancient and medieval life which explain either important elements of our civilization or which show how the movement for discovery and colonization originated. A glance at the outline shows that it is not intended that the topics should be presented as organized history. It goes without the saying that pupils in this grade are not prepared to study scientific history in its logical and orderly development. But, as stated in the report, they are prepared to receive more or less definite impressions that may be conveyed to them by means of pictures, descriptions, and illustrative stories, arranged in chronological sequence. In receiving such impressions, they will not understand the full meaning of the great events touched upon, but they will catch something of the spirit and purpose of the Greeks, the Romans, and other types of racial life.

For the seventh grade, it is recommended that the growth and settlement of the colonies be taken up with enough of the European background to explain events in America having their causes in England or Europe. Here should be considered also the American Revolution.

The subject matter of the eighth grade would include the inauguration of the new government, the political, industrial and social development of the United States, westward expansion and a brief study of the growth of the great rival states of Europe.

Is it not beyond dispute that much of our teaching of history in the past has failed of proper results for the reason that pupils advancing from grade to grade have been compelled to consider topics with which they have grown familiar? Who has not noted the deadening effect on the interest of pupils, especially in the history of our own country, where the prescribed course found in many schools has been faithfully followed, which provides a text in elementary American history for the fifth and sixth grades, succeeded by a grammar school American history in the next two grades? To secure continued interest, it is advised that there be offered, in each of the several years, one distinct portion or section of our country’s history; that this be presented with as much fulness as possible and that the recurrence in successive years of subject matter that has once been outlined be avoided.

While the proper distribution of historical subject matter is the prime feature of the report, the committee would emphasize the consideration of other items, such as the outline presented for elementary lessons on government; the training suitable for the teacher; the correlation with geography and literature, and the methods to be employed.

In offering the report, we are aware that a literal interpretation of some of its phases would preclude its use in many of our schools. But let it be borne in mind that no one of us has for a moment assumed that there is to be a rigid adherence to detail in the minor sub-divisions of each year’s work. If the report as a whole appeals to teachers as pointing the way to a practical solution for many of the problems now encountered, then may we look with confidence for more satisfying results from our elementary history teaching, and as a consequence expect more consideration for the subject itself on the part of those who control the making of school programs.

---

REPORT TO THE AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION BY THE COMMITTEE OF EIGHT[3]

REVIEWED BY SARAH A. DYNES, HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY IN NEW JERSEY STATE NORMAL AND MODEL SCHOOLS, TRENTON, N. J.

The course of study in history for elementary schools mapped out in the “Report of the Committee of Eight” is an attempt to secure by the aid of a national organization some uniformity in the program for history. The personnel of the committee led us to expect an able report. The specialist in American history, the specialist in European history, and the specialist in the pedagogy of history for elementary grades were all represented. Three superintendents of schools upon the committee seemed to warrant us in anticipating that the rights of other subjects in the elementary curriculum would be guarded, and that history would not be permitted to absorb an undue proportion of the pupil’s time. The presence of those closely associated with elementary schools caused the present actual condition of such schools to be kept clearly in mind while the work proceeded. Practical experience gained in dealing with both the elementary teacher and the elementary pupil led them to inquire at each step whether a proposed change were possible, while the experience of the specialists in American history and in European history naturally called attention to what would be desirable from the standpoint of subject-matter.

The committee presented a preliminary report for consideration and frank discussion at three different regular meetings of the American Historical Association held at Chicago, Baltimore and Providence respectively. A report of what had been accomplished by the committee at the close of its second year of work, was presented to the Department of Superintendents at a regular meeting of the National Educational Association for 1907. Certain features of the report were also discussed at a regular meeting of the History Teachers’ Association of the Middle States and Maryland, held in New York City. Suggested topics of the report were discussed by the Chicago History Teachers’ Association and by the History Teachers’ Association of the North Central States. From the foregoing it is easily seen that there has been no undue haste in arriving at conclusions. It will be noted also that all experienced teachers of history, and all superintendents who are really interested in improving the quality of the teaching of elementary history have had abundant opportunity to contribute toward the improvement of the proposed course, and to object to that which seemed visionary, impracticable, or unwise. Interest in the report has been widespread during the past three years, and it is gratifying to know that it is now published in a form which makes it accessible to all interested.

The course includes a series of organized groups of topics for the first eight years of school life. The most cursory examination of the work suggested for the primary grades brings to view these expressions: (1) “Historical backgrounds, (2) Stories, (3) Pictures, (4) Construction, (5) Teacher’s list of books.” This is certainly encouraging. It suggests mental pictures. It emphasizes vivid impressions of concrete, objective reality. Things are to be seen, touched, used in new combinations. The preparation of the teacher is to be in part from books, not from a book. She is made to feel that elementary history must be picture-making, not word-getting. A closer examination shows that there is no repetition of subject-matter as the child passes from grade to grade. This last feature will be welcomed most heartily by the elementary teacher of history. Nothing is more gratifying than to have the entire responsibility of teaching the topics assigned to her own grade. If she is a fifth-grade teacher, and is making her preparation for teaching a biography of Daniel Boone, she can look back through the topics suggested by the committee to be taken up in grades four, three, two and one, and congratulate herself that no other teacher has touched that topic. It is her privilege to introduce this hero with the fullest assurance that there is no danger of trespassing upon the territory of another. If, at the close of the work, the pupils of the fifth grade have a vivid picture of life on the border, if they have been led to sympathize with the dangers, the trials, the hardships of frontier life, and have gained an impression of the importance of Daniel Boone’s service to his fellow men, she has done a creditable piece of work. If they are bewildered, mystified, confused and glad to leave the subject, she has no one to blame but herself. By noting what has been done in the four preceding grades, she has reason to expect a certain amount of skill on the part of pupils in construction work. The pupils have already built wigwams, and that will make it easier for them to make a hunter’s camp, or to draw a representation of a cabin on the cattle range, or of the fort at Boonesborough. They have had practice in interpreting pictures and in finding pictures; they have had experience with sand-tables and in clay modeling and in making costumes; they have been reproducing stories and anecdotes, and taking part in discussions; consequently, she can expect a vocabulary in which there is a meaning and significance attached to the words used. What has been illustrated in the case of Daniel Boone is as true of any other topic. Some topics are to be taught in more than one grade, but in each case the committee has carefully planned to avoid overlapping and prevent repetition.

In the fifth grade the topics are organized into twelve groups, lettered A to L inclusive, with from three to five sub-topics in a group. The following selections show the general scope of the work outlined: Group D is “The Great West,” and Daniel Boone is one of the sub-topics to be taught in that group. Group E, “The Northwest,” contains the story of George Rogers Clark as one of the sub-topics. Group G, “Increasing the Size of the New Republic,” contains the story of Lewis and Clark. Group L, “Great Industries,” contains the following stories:

Cotton—the cotton fields; the factory.

Wheat—the wheat field; grain elevators.

Cattle—cattle-grazing; stockyards.

Coal and Iron—the mines; the furnaces; the products.

In addition to these biographical stories selected from the field of American history, the committee suggests that twenty minutes a week for one-half of the year should be devoted to the study of civics. The following are suggested topics to be discussed: “The Fire Department,” “The Police Department,” “The Post-office System,” “Street Cleaning and Sprinkling,” “Public Libraries.” The committee, in a table given on page 126, shows how a place may be made on the program in each grade for the study of history. That program provides only one recitation per week in the first three grades. In the fourth and fifth grades there would be two recitations a week. The work suggested in the report for the first five grades could be easily accomplished in the time stated in the program.

The committee suggests that a text-book be placed in the hands of the pupils in grades six, seven and eight, but emphasizes the necessity of oral work in the first five grades. They also advise the continuation of much oral work in the sixth grade. The subject-matter of the sixth grade includes such portions of European history as bear most directly on American history. The topics selected for study are organized into six groups, lettered A to F inclusive. Counting one recitation as the unit of measurement in estimating the relative amount of time to be devoted to each group, the committee estimates the relative importance of the groups thus: Groups F and C have thirteen units each; group E has twelve; group B has seven; group A has five; group D only three. This manner of indicating the relative importance of the groups will be of great value to the inexperienced teacher. The committee also wisely suggests “what not to attempt” in this grade. The greater portion of the pupil’s time in the sixth grade is to be spent upon the following topics: “Alfred and the English”; “How the English Began to Win Their Liberties”; “The Discovery of the Western World”; “European Rivalries Which Influenced Conquest and Colonization.” In this grade also there is to be instruction in civics for one-half year, twenty minutes a week. A list of topics suggested includes the following: “Water Supply and Sewerage System”; “The Board of Health”; “Juvenile Courts.” The program (p. 126) previously referred to provides three recitations per week in history for the sixth grade.

The topics of the seventh grade are organized into six groups, all of which are connected with the exploration and settlement of North America and the growth of the colonies, to the close of the Revolutionary War. Enough of the European background to make clear the significance of certain situations in America is included. The group headings are as follows:

A—“The First Settlements (in America) of the Three Rivals of Spain.”

B—“Exiles for Political or Religious Causes.”

C—“Colonial Rivalries.”

D—“Growth of the English Colonies.”

E—“Struggle for Colonial Empire between England and France.”

F—“From Colonies to Commonwealth.”

The topics in civics are those that grow naturally out of the instruction in history, such as an explanation of our search warrant in connection with a study of the writs of assistance, and in addition, topics of this character: “State Charities,” “State Schools,” “State Penal Institutions,” “National Parks,” “Preservation of Forests,” “Construction of Roads, Canals, Harbors.” These topics in civics are to be covered in a time allowance of forty minutes a week for the entire year. The number of recitations in history indicated in this grade is eighty-seven (87), of which the last group, F, has 34, and A has only 5; B has 18; C and D have 11 each; E has 8. The work for the eighth grade begins with the constitutional period of American history, and closes with the problems which confront our nation to-day, due to our rapid industrial development, commercial rivalry, and our recent annexations. These topics are organized into seven main groups, as follows:

A—“Organization of the United States.”

B—“The New Republic and Revolution in Europe.”

C—“Industrial and Social Development.”

D—“New Neighbors and New Problems.”

E—“Expansion Makes the Slavery Question Dominant.”

F—“The Crisis of the Republic.”

G—“The New Union and the Larger Europe.”

The committee suggests the relative amount of time to be devoted to each sub-topic in this grade. Ninety-four recitation periods are required to cover the work outlined, 19 of which are given to F, 16 to B, 15 to G; C and D have 12 each, and A and E have 10 each. The committee also suggests that an average of sixty minutes a week be devoted to civics in this grade, and that a text-book in civics, as well as a text-book in history, be placed in the hands of each pupil. The function of city, State and national government should be emphasized, rather than the machinery of each. The actual work of the government to-day, and concrete instances of civic duty should be discussed, and a special study of such topics as “Child Labor,” “Corruption in Politics,” “Best Methods of Work in Local City Governments,” is advised.

Fifteen pages are devoted to a discussion of the preparation of the teacher. The suggestions offered are helpful, and in accordance with the best educational theories. The entire chapter, though brief, shows clearly the need of special preparation, if a teacher hopes to make a success of her work. The entire book is a teacher’s book. The outlines given are not for the class-room; they are to serve as a suggestion to the teacher, who will make her own outlines, based upon the principles laid down in the report, and dealing with the phases of subject-matter which the committee selected. No attempt has been made to go beyond what is already being done in the best schools of the country. The committee has tried to show what is possible in elementary grades. The report will doubtless tend to improve the work in the less favored sections of the country. The plan of work presented is a very definite and carefully-considered plan, which is certainly entitled to a fair trial on its merits.

[“The Study of History in the Elementary Schools—Report to the American Historical Association by the Committee of Eight.” New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. 1909. Pp. xvii, 141. 50 cents.]

---

BY PROFESSOR FRANKLIN L. RILEY, UNIVERSITY OF MISSISSIPPI.

(Adapted to the Third or Fourth Grade.)

1. The Western Country and How It was Reached—Virginians and their neighbors moved oftener than the colonists to the north. Attracted by “mineral springs,” “salt licks” and “blue grass.” Buffalo paths converge at Cumberland Gap. Wilderness Road, two hundred miles long, from Virginia through this gap to Kentucky, made by Daniel Boone in charge of thirty men. At first only a narrow path for horsemen and footmen. Pack saddles, how made and used.

2. Daniel Boone, “Columbus of the Land.”—Born in Pennsylvania, father settled in Wilkes County, North Carolina, when Daniel was about 13 years old. Early life on frontier farm, used gun almost as early as hoe. Little log home. Married at 20; five years later he decided to move, wanted “elbow room.” “If these people keep coming, soon there will not be a bar in all this country.” Prospecting trip across the mountains, with two or three backwoodsmen at the time of the French and Indian War. Up a tree to escape from a bear. “D. Boone cilled a bar on this tree in 1760” on a beech tree in Eastern Tennessee.

3. New Homes in the Wilderness—Nine years after killing the bear in Tennessee he went to Kentucky to find a new home. Wild game, deer, bear, buffaloes, wolves. Shelter of logs open on one side. “Dark and Bloody Ground.” Indian tricks, imitating turkeys and owls. “Killed” a “stump.” Captured by Indians. Escape after seven days. Alone in the wilderness, 500 miles from home. Forty new settlers from North Carolina. Capture of Boone’s daughter and two other girls by Indians and their rescue. Elizabeth Kane and the grapevine swing. Boone a prisoner in Detroit. Indians refuse $500 for him. His escape. Removal to Missouri. Death and burial at Frankfort.

4. A Frontier Home—Log cabin in a clearing near the fort. Ladder against wall for stairway and pegs in wall for clothing. Rough boards supported by four wooden pegs for dining table. Dirt floor.

5. Life of a Pioneer Boy—Taught to imitate notes and calls of birds and wild animals, to set traps and to shoot the rifle. At 12 he became a fort soldier, with a porthole assigned to him. Taught to follow an Indian trail and to conceal his own when on the warpath.

6. Suggested Topics for Other Lessons:

(1) The Story of James Robertson.

(2) The Story of John Sevier.

(3) The Story of George Rogers Clark.

(4) Stories of the French in America and the Struggle for the Mississippi Valley.

7. Bibliography—Gordy’s “American Leaders and Heroes” (Charles Scribner’s Sons); McMurry’s “Pioneers of the Mississippi Valley” and Hart’s “Source Reader in American History,” No. 3, and Eggleston’s “Stories of Great Americans” and “First Book in American History” (A. B. Co.); Catherwood’s “Heroes of the Middle West,” and Blaisdell and Ball’s “Hero Stories from American History” (Ginn & Co.); Aunt Charlotte’s “Stories of American History” (D. Appleton & Co.).

1. Oral presentation. These stories should be given by the teacher in a simple, animated style, adapted to the mental status of the child. They should abound in narration rather than description. Children like action. During the first two years they should be related rather than read.

2. Illustrations. Frequent use should be made of blackboard illustrations. Printed pictures, objects, etc., should also be used.

3. Construction. Children should do constructive work along lines suggested by the lessons—draw pictures, make log houses, bows, arrows, wigwams, etc.

4. Reproduction. The stories should be frequently repeated by the pupil until they are thoroughly mastered. They should also be reproduced in written form as soon as the child is sufficiently advanced.

5. Note books. The children should copy their stories after they have been corrected into their history note books. Neatness should be emphasized.

6. Memory work. The children should memorize historical poems and brief extracts from historical literature, which are thoroughly comprehensible to them.

7. Reading. The children should be encouraged to acquire new facts for themselves from books that are easily comprehensible to them.

8. Reviews. There should be frequent reviews. These exercises should be varied as much as possible and should be often held at unexpected times. Call on different members of the class to tell of their favorite characters; give characteristic incidents not already related, in the life of a person, and let the children guess who it is; let them guess what certain pictures represent, etc.

9. Rewards. The child should be occasionally rewarded with something to read about his favorite character. Reward the mind, but do not permit it to be surfeited.

10. Problems. In the latter part of the primary course special attention should be given to historical problems. See McMurry’s “Special Method in History,” pp. 66-74.

1. Have the purpose and outline of the story well in hand before presenting it, and let your presentation be independent of the book. The outline of your story should be very carefully prepared.

2. Avoid complex details. Tell story vividly. “The educational value of these stories does not depend upon literal accuracy.”

3. The sequence of events and their relations are more important than dates. “A long time ago” means more to a child than 1492.

4. Lay special stress on ethical teaching; cut down wars and military campaigns as much as possible.

5. Go slowly. Haste is a poor policy. A teacher may sometimes devote weeks to a single character to advantage. Do not cram facts indiscriminately into children’s minds.

6. Do not repeat stories to the same children from year to year.

7. For directions “How to Select Stories,” see McMurry’s “Special Method in History,” pp. 34-40.

8. For directions “How to Tell Stories,” see Ibid, pp. 54-56.

9. For directions “How to Have Stories Reproduced,” see Ibid, pp. 57-58.

10. For a discussion of the difficulties of oral instruction, see Ibid, pp. 59-66.

---

BY ARMAND J. GERSON.

THE SPANISH CLAIM.
A Type Lesson.

Of the many complaints made by history teachers in secondary schools regarding preparation given in the grades perhaps none contains a greater amount of truth than the oft-repeated statement that while pupils leave our elementary schools with a large stock of historical terms and phrases they often lack a real grasp of their significance. I know of a pupil who after a whole year of Sixth Grade work defined tax as “money that is paid for tea,” and who honestly thought that George III’s ministers were “a sort of clergymen.” Still more frequent are the instances where the pupil’s notions of terms used are so hazy and inadequate as not to admit of definition at all.

This condition may be variously explained. The trouble is often caused by an improper use of the text-book, the incompetent teacher resting content if the pupil commits the words on the pages and recites them with some semblance of intelligence. In most cases, however, it is safe to say that the misconceptions are the result of the teacher’s failure to grasp the child’s difficulties, his inability to put himself into the pupil’s place and realize the mental equipment which the child brings to the grasping of the new ideas. Be the cause of the difficulty what it may, the recognition of its existence must be the first step toward its removal.

The word “claim” occupies a prominent place among the disturbers of the peace. In the course of the history work the children become familiar with the fact that the voyages and explorations of the Spanish, English, French and Dutch somehow give rise to “land claims” whose overlapping results in interesting international conflicts. Judicious questioning, however, is apt to disclose a surprising lack of definiteness as to the meaning of this word “claim.” In accordance with the type-lesson method this vagueness of comprehension might readily be avoided if the “claim” concept were developed thoroughly in connection with the explorations of a single European nation. In other words, the teaching of a typical claim forms the surest sort of basis for the comprehension of land claims in general. Spain, because of the early date of its explorations, naturally suggests itself as the type. Let the pupil understand intensively all that we can teach him about the Spanish claim—how far it extended, on what it was based, what it meant—and there will be no difficulty when we come to develop the claims of England, France and Holland.

In presenting the type lesson on the Spanish claim the teacher must carefully distinguish and strongly emphasize the type-elements, i. e., those aspects of the subject which help form a clear concept or pattern. Chief among these type-elements may be mentioned the following: A clear understanding of what we mean by “right of discovery;” some notion of the distance a claim may be said to extend beyond the point or coast explored; a definite comprehension of what is meant when we speak of a nation “owning” land; a mental attitude toward the rights of the original inhabitants. Reference to these fundamentals will have to be made repeatedly when the claims of other European nations are in their turn presented to the class, but this mere reference is all that will be required if the type-elements developed in connection with the Spanish claim have been thoroughly grounded. The particular incidents of the Spanish story, pedagogically speaking, are of less fundamental significance.

In connection with the Columbus story the class will have been brought to see that the chief political consequence of that event consisted in the extension of Spanish dominion. “For Castile and Leon Columbus discovered a New World” contains an ethical principle immediately recognized by every boy of ten. This principle contains the essence of the whole theory of discovery and exploration, and should, for a time at least, be allowed to remain undisputed. It might be well even to reinforce this theory by reference to the widely accepted principle applied by our boys and girls in their everyday life,—“finding is keeping.” Ownership of what we find may indeed be disputed by others, but the finder may at least be said to have a “claim” to it. It is in this sense that Spain had a “claim” to the New World.

But a nation’s claim to newly discovered land is in many ways different from a boy’s claim to a marble he has found. First of all, the boy has probably picked up the whole marble and put it in his pocket. The Spanish explorers, on the other hand, only caught glimpses of part of the edge of a great continent. Had they a good claim to the whole continent or could they only claim the parts they had found? Difference of opinion on this point is very possible and may give rise to profitable class discussion. Ignorance of the size and shape of the continent, concentration of Spanish interest in the south, and the decree of Pope Alexander should all be pointed out as determining elements in the gradual defining of the Spanish claim. The work of each of the Spanish explorers should be reviewed in this connection, and the claim finally located on the map.

It is important, in the next place, that the pupils should devote some thought to the question of what we mean when we say Spain “owned” Florida, Mexico, etc. In this connection attention may well be called to the theory of government generally held in the sixteenth century. The modern notion of government existing for the sake of the governed had scarcely taken form in the minds of men. The nations of Europe were avowedly selfish. Spain “owned” America in the sense that she could make laws for its people, dispose of its territory, and control its resources.

Finally, a complete notion of European claims to the New World must perforce include some reference to the rights of the natives. The comparative rights of the natives and Europeans is fortunately not a question upon which we are called upon to pronounce a verdict. As an element in all colonizing activities it requires our attention, however, and it certainly affords admirable opportunity for cultivating our pupils’ human sympathies.

Reference should be made to the pre-eminence of the Spanish claim on the score of priority. It is to be borne in mind that our type-lesson, besides forming the basis for the teaching of subsequent claims, will have still greater significance when the conflict of European nations leads to the great international struggle for the New World. Constant reference to maps and charts, and, more important still, the making of claim maps by the pupils themselves, constitute an obvious, but none the less essential, means of rendering definite and permanent the results of the “claim” lesson. A progressive map upon which the conflict of claims could be developed will be of particular value.

Our endeavor throughout the Spanish claim lesson should be to proceed as slowly and carefully as possible. Much of the detail presented need not be retained as such, but will serve its most useful purpose by forming a setting for the salient points. The aim of the type-lesson is to construct a firm and sure foundation for later work.

---

From the 25th of September, when the Half-Moon and the Clermont left their temporary berths in the Kill van Kill, in Staten Island, to October 9th, when they reached the city of Troy, the people of the city and the State of New York devoted themselves with remarkable singleness of purpose to the celebration of two historical incidents of world-wide importance: the discovery of the river by Henry Hudson in 1609 and the successful completion of the first steamboat voyage up the river to Albany in 1807. For months before, laymen and professional historians and history teachers had been busy preparing for the celebration, and the result of their work was to be seen in the parades and pageants. Circulars, instructions, maps, pictures, and even historical treatises, succeeded each other in almost endless succession. Of them all, the pamphlet issued by the State Department of Education, entitled “Hudson-Fulton Celebration, 1609-1807-1909,” and the printed circular issued by the New York City Department of Education, entitled “Hudson-Fulton Celebration—Suggestions for Exercises,” are especially recommended to teachers who are looking for suggestions as to plans for similar celebrations. Both can be had by application to the proper authorities.

The parades and pageants which marked the week’s celebration in New York City have been so thoroughly described in the newspapers and reviews that it would be useless to discuss them once again in this connection. From the point of view of the teacher, the naval parade of Saturday, September 25th, the historical parade of Tuesday, September 28th, and the school commemorative exercises of Wednesday, September 29th, and Saturday, October 2d, were the most important and the most significant. Though none of these was perfect in all its details, still all of them gave to the children of the city opportunities for visualizing conditions as they existed in the past such as no other method could have done. Pages and pages of description, for instance, could give the child no such idea of the difficulties of navigation in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries as the brief view of the top-heavy, clumsy and poorly-constructed model of the Half-Moon did. More valuable still were the exercises, largely in the form of dramatization, in which the children of every grade, from the kindergarten to the last year of the high school, participated, both on Wednesday morning and on Saturday afternoon. Here the work was the result of the children’s own constructive imagination, aided and directed by skilled teachers and historians. Once again, as far as possible, the children were allowed to relive their lives under conditions which approximated those which surrounded their predecessors during the last three centuries.

As to the permanent results of the celebration, it may be said, first, that New York City and New York State are to-day richer than they would otherwise have been in historical monuments and commemorative tablets which are of constant educational value. Further, both the city and the State have been stirred to an extraordinary pitch of civic pride and civic activity and in both the children have participated largely. What the past has accomplished has been thoroughly emphasized; what the future demands has by no means been neglected. The lesson has thus been both historical and political. As a model for other cities this celebration will long stand preëminent. Though there were many errors and many shortcomings, other communities will, nevertheless, find in the exercises and in the pageants much to copy that was valuable. Though the time and energy expended were great, the results were commensurate.

A. M. W.

---

---

It is not the purpose of the editors of the Magazine to espouse any particular pedagogical policy. Articles may appear in the paper which advocate new policies or radical changes of method in the school or college curriculum; but such papers express the views of the contributors only, and not necessarily of the editorial staff of the paper. Rather it is their wish to make the paper a mirror of the best thought and practice in the profession, and to this end they will welcome correspondence and contributions upon all phases of questions arising in the teaching of history. Let us have a frank and full discussion of the problems facing the teacher, and of the best way of solving the problems; not fads or hobbies, but sound experience and strong pedagogical ideals. The editors invite the coöperation of their readers in making the paper a “clearing-house for ideas in the profession.”

It may be a matter of surprise that a paper devoted largely to the interests of teachers of history in secondary schools and colleges should print in one number nearly five pages of matter relating to history in elementary schools. Yet there should be no need of an apology. Were not the several parts of the American educational system so independent of one another, our secondary and college teachers of history would not pride themselves upon their ignorance of conditions in the elementary schools. Because organically or politically there is little correlation among the three parts of the system, each part attempts to ignore the others, rejecting suggestions concerning its own work, and grudgingly and condescendingly giving advice concerning the others. With a few notable exceptions, several of whom appear as contributors to this number of the Magazine, college men in America have kept sedulously away from the problems of history teaching in the elementary school, or if they have turned their gaze upon the schools, it has been to seek a market for a new elementary history textbook.

Yet the elementary school needs the best thought that the nation can give to it; not the thought of elementary school men alone, but the clearness and directness and thoroughness which come so frequently with college training. It is superciliousness or inertia which leads a college instructor to say that he cannot realize the problems of the elementary school, and then to send his children to a class taught by a young girl fresh from the normal school or high school. It was not thus that the schedules for history in the Prussian or French schools were made. It is not by thus leaving the determination of policy to weaker employees that great corporations succeed. And how much more valuable are our children than corporate wealth!

The report of the Committee of Eight is beyond doubt the most important feature of the year in the teaching of history in America. It deserves to rank with the report of the Committee of Seven, and its influence may well be even greater. The report is remarkable for its sanity, its absence of theorizing, its understanding of the mind of the child at several ages, its clearness and general helpfulness. Not content with merely outlining the field of history for each grade, the committee has realized the weakness of the teacher, and has constructed a course of study for her, and has even gone so far as to advise the emphasis and amount of time to be given to each subject. Schedule-makers have previously had no advice from historians upon these points; they have been left severely alone to fix their days and hours and subjects as they might think best. The report changes all this by combining the scholarly knowledge of the historian with the skill of the pedagogical student and with the worldly wisdom of the schedule maker.

Of particular significance and originality is the arrangement of topics by years in such a manner that the student receives something new in each grade. Even although all the work centers about the history of the United States, yet there is no deadening repetition year after year. The topics are carefully selected for each grade with a view to increasing difficulty with the advancing years of the student. Perhaps no one feature of the report marks a more distinct advance than this arrangement.

Not only should the report have a strong influence upon the arrangement of the elementary history course, but it should also lead to a great improvement in the instruction of history. Not every teacher can meet the requirements set by the committee; the result will be a wider adoption of the “group” or “department” system, by which the teacher is given charge of one subject or of a group of allied topics, such as English and history, or geography and nature study. Such a division of labor is in accord with the tendencies of the day; it is in the interests of superior work in all subjects; and it means increased mental development not for the child alone, but for the teacher as well. The report would deserve a hearty welcome if it did no more than advance the cause of the departmental or group teacher.

It will do much more than this. It will add dignity to the work in history; it will give school administrators an ideal of work in the subject; and best of all, it will give the children of the nation a course in history which will be stimulating and of definite cultural value. Teachers of history and school administrators should unite to see that the new plan is given a fair test under the best possible circumstances. High school and college teachers should join with elementary teachers in endorsing this plan for raising the standard of history teaching in America.

---

PROFESSOR BEARD’S WORK REVIEWED BY JOHN HAYNES, PH.D., DORCHESTER HIGH SCHOOL, BOSTON, MASS.

This volume is an attempt to do for the student of Government what the source book does for the student of History. Prof. Beard has prepared it primarily to be used with his own “American Government and Politics,” which is now in preparation, but of course it can be used with any text-book on the subject. The selections include materials of many kinds, among them most of the Federal Constitution (groups of clauses bearing upon the same subject being given at the beginning of the appropriate chapter), parts of the constitutions of various States, decisions of the Federal Supreme Court and other courts of last resort, arguments made in Congress, State legislatures, constitutional conventions and political meetings, party platforms, letters, laws, treaties and proclamations. The Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation are given in full. Each selection is preceded by a brief introduction of a few lines which is admirable in giving a succinct statement of the main point or points of the document which follows.

The wide scope of the selections, both as to subjects and the sources from which they are taken, is a testimony to the generous amount of labor bestowed upon the preparation of the volume. On the whole, admirable judgment has been used in choosing the material. Still some things are absent which one might expect to find. The case of McCulloch vs. Maryland is very properly quoted at some length, but the famous Dartmouth College case, whose consequences were very important, is not cited. The book would be improved by the addition of selections designed to illustrate judicial procedure, like a charge to a jury, a declaration in a civil suit or an indictment. Examples of different forms of ballots might well be given, especially of the ballot used in Oregon when laws are submitted to popular vote.

The selections, which as far as possible are taken from the writings of men who have had practical experience in the conduct of government, have the great merit of giving a view of government as it really is. The seamy side is not hidden. There are documents illustrating the corruption of the police, the tyranny of the boss, the iniquities of the gerrymander, senatorial courtesy, corporations in politics and the unjust assessment of taxable property.

A great excellence of this book is its being up to date. Examples of this are selections from the Oregon law on the election of United States Senators, from Oklahoma’s Constitution, from the “Report of the Boston Finance Commission,” issued in 1909, and the “Report of the Minnesota Tax Commission” of the preceding year.

This volume, which is admirably adapted to its purpose, is a distinct addition to the resources of the teacher of Government. While the average teacher is likely to be more hampered by the entirely inadequate time allowed for the subject than by lack of good material, a contribution like this of Professor Beard tends to dignify the subject, which is all too likely to be treated as a tail to the history kite, and to secure for it the place which it deserves in school courses.

[“Readings in American Government and Politics.” By Charles A. Beard. New York. The Macmillan Co., 1909. Pp. xxiii-624. Price, $1.50.]

---

DR. ALLEN’S WORK REVIEWED BY LOUIS NUSBAUM.

Dr. Allen has presented a work which in the directness, forcefulness and logic of its appeal for good health as a civic duty makes the book worthy to be considered as epoch-making. To quote Dr. Allen’s thought, changed conditions of social and industrial life have virtually eliminated from present-day politics the inalienable rights for which our ancestors fought and died, and in their stead has come the need to formulate rules which will insure to every citizen the economic and industrial rights essential to twentieth century happiness. And just as community of interest was the incentive to attaining those political rights in the past, so united action is necessary to secure health rights.

Scarcely any phase of the question of public health is left untouched in this interesting little book. From the consideration of sound teeth as a commercial asset, through the discussion of a long list of preventable and removable diseases and disorders, to the examination of tuberculosis as an industrial loss, Dr. Allen has made out so strong a case against the social losses due to disease, that one is necessarily aroused to a new sense of public duty. And it is in this very awakening of a slumbering public consciousness that the book will do its most effective work. As Prof. William T. Sedgwick says in his introduction, a reading of the chapter headings merely “will cause surprise and rejoicing.”

The facts of the existence of the health conditions revealed in this book are not new, but the immensity of these known conditions, as successively enumerated here, is almost astounding. For a brief moment in reading the book one is led to feel that it is the work of an extremist or enthusiast, to be discounted in effect for a certain measure of high coloring, yet a careful inspection reveals the fact that everything is told in an honest and direct, even if at times dogmatic, way.

Unlike the work of many pseudo-reformers, Dr. Allen’s book is comprehensive in its scope in that it not only reveals existing conditions, but it indicates how these conditions may be remedied and tells of the efforts thus far made to apply the proper remedies. After pointing out that the best index to community health is the physical welfare of school children, Dr. Allen compares the European method of doing things at school with the American method of getting things done.

No brief review can do justice to a work so inspiring that to be instantly effective it needs but to be read widely. It is filled with material that should be particularly at the command of every teacher, if not of every parent, in the land. Its especial interest to teachers of civics lies in its analysis of the relation of public health and its consequent economic conditions to organized government and to the body social.

[“Civics and Health.” By William H. Allen, secretary, Bureau of Municipal Research, with an introduction by William T. Sedgwick, professor of biology in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston: Ginn & Co., 1909. Pp. xi-411.]

---

ARTHUR M. WOLFSON, PH.D., Editor.

A STUDY OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

The Declaration of Independence is, in every way, an ideal document for study in a secondary school. Every student in the class is undoubtedly familiar with it; he has heard it quoted, in whole or in part, on numberless occasions; he thinks he knows all about it, and yet the teacher can easily show him that it contains vast stores of ideas which up to the present time he has never even suspected. No document in all American history is so easy of interpretation: the language is clear and simple; the phraseology is direct and unencumbered; the document is divided and subdivided so that anyone who takes the trouble can easily analyze it. The Declaration itself is to be found in almost every school history, and the sources and secondary authorities which illustrate it are easily accessible and not too difficult for the ordinary secondary school student.

First, a few suggestions as to where these sources and secondary authorities may be found. Of primary importance is Macdonald’s “Select Charters Illustrative of American History—1606 to 1775;” second, though not so good, is Preston’s “Documents Illustrative of American History—1606 to 1863;” third, Hart’s “American History Told by Contemporaries,” Volume II, Part VI; fourth, the “American History Leaflets,” Numbers 11, 19, 21, and 33. Beside these the teacher may easily discover one or another of the documents in many other places. Of the secondary authorities, beside the ordinary histories of the American nation, all of which contain the leading facts and incidents upon which the Declaration is based, the teacher is referred especially to Friedenwald’s “Declaration of Independence.” Next to that, the most important works are Moses Coit Tyler’s “Literary History of the American Revolution,” and Frothingham’s “Rise of the Republic of the United States,” particularly the foot-notes. Furthermore, the teacher and the student will find illuminating essays on the political theories of the Declaration of Independence in Merriam’s “American Political Theories,” in A. Lawrence Lowell’s “Essays in Government,” in Leslie Stephen’s “English Thought in the Eighteenth Century,” and in Bryce’s “Studies in History and Jurisprudence.” By no means all of these works need be consulted; an examination of one or two of them will suffice.

The study of the Declaration falls naturally into three parts and students may therefore profitably be set to work separately or in groups on one of its three problems. First, there is the problem of the growth of the idea of independence; second, there is the problem of the validity and cogency of the numberless adverse criticisms of the Declaration. Is it merely a mass of “glittering and sounding generalities of natural right?” as Choate called it. Is it a partisan and unfair statement? Is its political theory false and therefore of no historical importance? Third, there is the possibility of submitting the Declaration itself to complete and thorough class-room analysis.

Taking each of these problems separately, let us endeavor to set in order first, the sources which should be studied in tracing the growth of the idea of independence in the colonies. Up to 1761, though there had been causes for differences of opinion between the Crown and the colonies, none of these causes had led to an open breach. In 1761 came the difficulty about the Writs of Assistance in which James Otis took such a prominent part. Otis’ speech on the Writs of Assistance, and especially his “Vindication of the House of Representatives” and his “Rights of the Colonies” may therefore be studied with profit. In them will be found the first statement of the American theory of government. These documents may be found in Hart’s Contemporaries, in the American History Leaflets, and in various other places. Following then in quick succession come the various declarations of the colonies and the various petitions to the Crown, beginning with the Declaration of the Stamp Act Congress issued in 1765 and ending with the Olive Branch Petition issued in June, 1775. Most of these documents can be found most conveniently in Macdonald’s Select Charters and the teacher can make his own selection according to his taste and the size of his class. The only thing to be emphasized in the study of any or all of these documents is the fact that, as Friedenwald expresses it, in speaking of the First Continental Congress (Declaration of Independence, p. 28), “spirited and outspoken as were the resolutions of the Congress of 1774 in stating their demands, there is no sign among them all that can rightly be interpreted as indicating a wish for the establishment, even remotely, of an independent government.” The same facts can be gleaned from a study of Tyler’s “Literary History of the American Revolution,” Vol. I, p. 458 ff.

With the news of the rejection of the Olive Branch Petition which reached the colonies in November, 1775, begins a new phase of the American Revolution. Thenceforward, there is a rapid and steady growth of the idea of political independence. The development of this idea should be studied in such documents as the declarations of the various colonies, especially the Virginia Declaration of Rights, June, 1776, and in the writings of the Revolutionary leaders such as Thomas Paine’s pamphlet entitled “Common Sense” issued in January, 1776, and the correspondence of John Adams. The idea culminates, of course, in the Declaration of Independence.

“Under this aspect,” says Tyler (Vol. I, p. 477) comparing the Revolution to the Civil War, “the American Revolution had just two stages; from 1764 to 1776, its champions were Nullifiers without being Secessionists; from 1776 to 1783, they were Secessionists, and as events proved, successful Secessionists.”

Criticism of the Declaration of Independence began with the animadversions of John Adams in his letter to Pickering in 1822 and has continued ever since. First, it has been declared that the ideas expressed in the preamble are not new, that “there is not an idea in it,” as Adams said, “but what had been hackneyed in Congress for two years before;” second, that the document is partisan and that the statement of grievances is unfair to the British Crown and to Parliament; third, that the political philosophy contained in the preamble is false and contrary to the facts of history.

In a short paper like this it is impossible to examine each of these criticisms in detail. The teacher who is interested can easily find in Friedenwald and in Tyler and in the other authorities mentioned above full and adequate discussion of each of these charges. Here it must suffice to say in answer to the first charge that Jefferson himself in a letter to Madison, dated August 30, 1823, declared, “I did not consider it any part of my charge to invent new ideas altogether, and to offer no sentiment which had ever been expressed before.... I thought it a duty to be, on that occasion, a passive auditor of the opinions of others, more impartial judges than I could be of its merits and demerits.” In other words, Jefferson’s task was not to invent, as French publicists were prone to do on such occasions, new theories of government, but simply to express the ideas which were the product of the political discussion which was going on about him, and which would be familiar and acceptable to the men in America and in Europe to whom the Declaration was addressed.

That the document is partisan is of course true; but this is scarcely a valid criticism. Neither Jefferson nor any of his colleagues claimed to sit as judges between the colonies and the mother country. They were bound merely to put their claims as strongly as they could, and then leave the judgment of the case to “a candid world.”

Third, as long at the Declaration be studied merely as an historical document, it matters not whether its theories be false or true; it matters only that the student understand how completely its principles dominated the minds of the men who had a share in drawing up the document and the minds of men both in America and in Europe to whom it was addressed.

Coming now to the analysis of the Declaration itself, we find that it falls naturally into three parts. First, there is the preamble in which Jefferson and his colleagues set forth the political theory current in the colonies in 1776; second, there is the enumeration of grievances by which the colonists hoped to prove that the king had violated their sacred rights, and finally there is the conclusion, namely, “That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states.”

The political doctrine of the Declaration is well known. Summed up in a single phrase, it is commonly called the Compact Theory of Government; that is, that all men are born with certain “natural rights,” that to secure these rights they enter by their own consent into political unions (the compact), that when these natural rights are violated by those whom they have set up to govern them, they have a right to throw off the restraints of government, to enter into a new compact, “to provide new guards for their future security.” It used to be supposed that Jefferson derived this theory of government from the writings of the French philosophers, of whom Rousseau was the most famous. This idea, however, has long since been exploded. We know now that the American revolutionary statesmen from Otis to Jefferson were impregnated with good English ideas, that they looked to John Locke, not to Rousseau, as their master. The teacher should therefore make clear to his students just what the ideas of Locke were and especially the occasion which gave them birth. It is not a matter of chance that Locke’s Treatises on Government were issued in the period of the Revolution of 1688 and the student should be made to understand this. For a full discussion of the almost exact verbal relation between the Declaration of Independence and the writings of Locke the teacher is referred to the books mentioned at the beginning of this paper.

Perhaps the most valuable class exercises in connection with the Declaration of Independence is an analysis of the grievances set forth in the document and the effort to find the specific acts upon which these statements are based. Several of them refer to acts and events whose history is obscure, but most of them can easily be traced to their sources. For a thorough analysis of the grievances, the teacher should go to Friedenwald, Chapters X and XI. Here we can give only the briefest outline. Thus, for instance, a search of the Journals of the Board of Trade will show that at least twenty important laws were rejected or suspended by the Crown in 1773, that the consideration of other laws was neglected sometimes as long as four or five years (Sections 1 and 2); that the king absolutely forbade his governors in 1767 and even earlier to allow the colonial assemblies to organize new counties in the Appalachian region unless they were willing to deprive these counties of representation (Section 3). The facts upon which Sections 4, 5, and 6 are based may be found in almost any school history. The grievances stated in Sections 7 and 8 are again somewhat obscure and cannot therefore be used with profit for class-room discussion. The next three sections, however, refer to acts and events which grew out of the attempted enforcement of the various acts of parliament between 1765 and 1775 and which can therefore be found without difficulty. Sections 12 and 13 likewise are based on facts which any student can discover in his text book. The facts upon which Section 14, which refers to the various acts of Parliament attempting to regulate colonial trade and colonial government, is based, the student can again discover by consulting his history; while the last four grievances which complain of acts done by the king since the outbreak of the Revolution can be analysed with the greatest facility.

The conclusion of the Declaration needs no special study. It follows naturally from the preamble, and from the statement of grievances which Jefferson and his colleagues now considered as proved. The irony, conscious or unconscious, of Jefferson’s use of the exact language of the Declaratory Act of 1766, always impresses the student when the comparison is made clear (Macdonald, Charters, p. 316). Another fruitful comparison is with the Dutch Act of Abjuration, of July 24, 1581 (Old South Leaflets, No. 72).

The student should be required to know exactly the language of the most significant phrases of the conclusion; indeed, certain striking and important phrases throughout the Declaration may very well be set to the students for exact memorization.

---

D. C. KNOWLTON, PH.D., Editor.

THE CLOSE OF THE MIDDLE AGES AND THE TRANSITION TO THE RENAISSANCE.

The order in which the main topics shall be presented to the class is settled in part for the teacher by the particular text-book in use. In fact, this feature of a book may have been an important factor in its selection. Almost every possible combination of topics may be found in the text-books now on the market, ranging all the way from the strictly chronological presentation of the events to an apparent disregard of the time element altogether. Among the former are to be found authors who, though endeavoring to follow the chronological order seek so to bind together the events of a given century or more that they may be considered as one great topic. Such attempts at generalization, however, may prove misleading to the student. Almost any book, if rightly used, allows the teacher a little latitude not only in the choice of topics, but also in the order of presentation. If the teacher skips about too much it may lead to misconception and confusion on the part of the student. If, however, the text-book and the library facilities at the command of the teacher allow of considerable freedom in respect to order, it is at the best a very perplexing question to settle. It may be a comparatively easy matter to reach a conclusion as to the order of the first few topics, say to the revival of the empire by Otto I, but from that time forward to the Renaissance so many combinations and arrangements are possible that it becomes increasingly difficult to hit upon an order which is entirely satisfactory. The Crusades, for example, may be considered before the teacher has finished the struggle between the popes and the emperors, for the most important of these movements overlap this great contest. Then there is the question of how and where to give the student some insight into English conditions so that he may understand the relation of that country to the main stream of European development. Again there is the question of just where and in what connection to present the life and culture so that it may leave the most lasting impression. There are many good reasons for leaving the presentation of the Crusades until after the struggle between the popes and emperors and then considering the life of the times especially in its connection with the rising towns. It is an easy and a natural transition from the development of trade as affected by the Crusades to a consideration of the towns themselves and town life. Conditions here can be presented in a sharp contrast to those discussed earlier in connection with feudalism.

It has been suggested that 1268 be selected as a turning point in the history of Europe, marking as it does the practical disappearance for the time being of the empire as a factor in politics, the beginning of the decline of the papacy, and the rise of the third estate, which is illustrated in England by the growth of the House of Commons and in Germany and Italy by the two great city leagues and the power of Venice, Florence and Genoa. If this suggestion is followed, the Hundred Years’ War and the history of the papacy in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries may serve to introduce the Renaissance if a discussion of the latter is preceded or followed by a general summary of the political situation in Europe at the opening of the sixteenth century, with special reference to those powers, both new and old, which are to dominate in the new period.

The attempt to bridge the period between the Hundred Years’ War and the Renaissance and Reformation is attended with a great many real difficulties, which are aggravated rather than lightened by the usual arrangement of material to be found in the text-book. There is not only an apparent absence of unifying elements, but the impression created on teacher and student is that of turmoil and confusion, with here and there a situation full of dramatic interest. “Only the closest attention,” declares one writer, “can detect the germs of future order in the midst of the struggle of dying and nascent forces, ... The dominant characteristic of the age is its diversity, and it is hard to find any principle of coördination.”[5] Although the task before the secondary teacher is not an easy one, it is possible by confining the attention of the student to a few fundamental facts successfully to meet the problem.

The stories of the Babylonian Captivity and the Great Schism can be so presented that they will serve not only to accentuate the great change which was taking place in Western Europe in the formation of powerful States like England, France and Spain, but in such a manner as to make clearer the Renaissance in Italy, and the wave of religious reform which swept over Europe before this earlier movement had entirely spent its force. The student can easily appreciate the contrast presented by the condition of the papacy in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and its might in the days of Gregory VII and Innocent III.

It is more difficult just here to show how these events were connected with the Renaissance. A number of circumstances combined together in Italy to accentuate city development, not the least of which was the failure of the popes and emperors to realize their dreams of universal dominion. The final overthrow of the Hohenstaufen has already been discussed. Probably no set of circumstances contributed more to bring the papacy into disrepute and reduce them to the position of Italian princes forced to look after their own private affairs than the conditions which prevailed in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The effects, then, of the residence at Avignon and the circumstances attending the return to Rome, call for special emphasis.

Although the schism was healed by the Council of Constance, so little was done by this assembly and the other councils which followed it to reform the abuses which had crept into the Church, that it is not strange that the demand for a reform voiced by such men as Erasmus and Luther in the sixteenth century met with a warm reception in so many quarters. This great movement, which has been called the Protestant revolt, becomes clearer if the attention has been drawn to the teachings and work of Wycliffe and Huss, who even at this early date uttered words which were by no means lost. With these facts in mind, not forgetful of the decided tendencies toward the formation of strong states, each sufficient unto itself, to which reference has already been made, the establishment of national churches in the sixteenth century does not impress the student as a strange phenomenon incapable of explanation.

A survey of the political situation at the beginning of the sixteenth century will not only serve to deepen some of the impressions already made, but will furnish the student with a vantage point from which he can appreciate the better the great changes which were soon to follow. Such a summary should be made with a map before the class, and all should be urged to marshal the salient facts in the history of the different countries as they come up for consideration. The order to be followed will, of course, depend somewhat on the treatment of the Renaissance. The logical order perhaps would be to take the older states first and then the more recent powers, like Spain, the Ottoman Turks, Switzerland, possibly including the Baltic peninsula. The following simple outline is offered merely as a suggestion, and can be amplified at the discretion of the teacher so as to include a wider survey.

I. The Older States.

1. England.

a. Hundred Years’ War.

b. Wars of the Roses and overthrow of feudalism.

c. Establishment of the Tudors.

2. France.

a. Hundred Years’ War.

b. Louis XI and Burgundy.

3. Germany (the Empire).

a. The Interregnum (to 1273).

b. Election of Rudolph of Hapsburg and his conquest of Austria.

c. The Golden Bull, 1347.

d. Title hereditary in Austrian House, 1438-1806.

4. Italy.

a. Beginning of the Renaissance.

b. The five great States.

c. Claims of France and Spain.

II. The New States.

1. Spain.

a. Rise of the Christian kingdoms and struggles against the Moors.

b. Union of Castile and Aragon and fall of Granada.

c. Spain in the new world.

d. Maximilian’s marriages.

2. The Ottoman Turks.

a. Appearance in time of the Crusades.

b. Invasions of Europe.

c. Conquest of Constantinople, 1453.

3. Switzerland—struggle for independence.

4. The Baltic States.

a. The Union of Calmar, 1397.

b. Independence of Sweden.—Gustavus Vasa.

It will be noted that new material is presented in this connection, as, for example, in the case of all the new powers, and also to some extent in the treatment of Germany and Italy.

The text-book will probably furnish adequate material not only for the Hundred Years’ War itself, but for the gradual development of France and England in the years preceding the struggle. Lodge, in the preface to “The Close of the Middle Ages,” states some of the problems involved in a study of the period. In his concluding chapter he attempts to characterize the Middle Ages and show their relation to the Renaissance. Seignobos’ “History of Medieval and Modern Civilization” contains two well-written chapters on “The End of the Middle Ages and the Establishment of Absolute Power in Europe” (chapters xv-xvi). Summaries of the political situation at the close of the Middle Ages are to be found in most of the text-books. Chapter xxiii in Robinson, “Western Europe,” portrays conditions at the beginning of the sixteenth century. In the source books of Thatcher and McNeal, of Robinson and of Ogg are found extracts illustrating the history of the papacy during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The former marshals all the important documents together in a section entitled “The Church. 1250-1500.” Robinson’s selections are perhaps as useful as any for the light they throw on the reform movement. Froissart’s “Chronicles,” furnish abundant material on the Hundred Years’ War.

---

WILLIAM FAIRLEY, Ph.D., Editor.

SPARTA, ATHENS, THE PERSIAN WARS.

The fact that we are now to trace the very distinct development of Athens and of Sparta points out an essential characteristic of the Greek race: their division into rival and warring states. A fine question to arouse thought on the part of pupils is: How could little states so near together as Attica, Laconia, Arcadia and Bœotia come to differ so in their characteristics? Why were they not all developed nearly along the same lines, like the people of the United States? Let the children be brought to see that the lack of means of communication, in contrast with our post and telegraph and newspaper, goes far to explain this. This isolated development, in spite of the common language, games and festivities, was the perpetual weakness of Greece.

Sparta, unlike Attica, was essentially a military State. Her chief town needed no walls because it was always an armed camp. Botsford well points out that in earlier times the Spartans were probably the superiors of the Athenians in culture and refinement; but their self-imposed discipline made them a race of soldiers. We know that the Periœci were successful artisans and traders; but the controlling passion of the little nation was military efficiency. Everything seems to have been sacrificed to that. When the classes come to the glories of the Athenian golden age, it will be well to point out that while she has her scores of names which are luminous in art, literature, science and philosophy, from the annals of Sparta the world knows mainly Lycurgus, the lawgiver, and Leonidas, the hero of Thermopylæ. If a teacher is inclined to cultivate in his pupils the idea that military glory is not to be the main concern, he may well use the Spartan record. Yet Sparta with these limitations played a mighty part in the story of the Greek struggle. Her armed efficiency more than once saved Greece as a whole when the less practical Athenian system had broken down.

The names of the famous contests are enshrined in the world’s admiration. Aside from a formal knowledge of the fascinating struggle, deeper things are to be considered. What was the danger to Europe in this Persian attack? Persians were of the same race as Greeks. Why would it not have been well for them in their might to tack the little Greek city states on as part of a great world empire? And the secret of the success of Greece in repelling them is to be found in the essential difference between the thoughtful self-respecting Greek, and the flogged and servile Persian. We speak of the “man behind the gun.” In those days it was the “man who held the sword.”

Athens and Switzerland are popular synonyms for democracy. Yet Switzerland has only become truly democratic within the past century, and Athens never was truly so. This has been alluded to in a preceding article. What did happen in Athens was a wonderful growth from aristocratic exclusiveness toward democracy. The gains that were made brought about finally a state of things that was never approached elsewhere in the ancient world save possibly in the Hebrew commonwealth. For this advance all honor is due the men of Athens. A comparative study of the earlier constitution with the successive reforms of Solon and Cleisthenes may well be used to point out that the common people were more and more coming into their own. West, on p. 125 of his “Ancient World,” has a table of some of these constitutions which might well be completed as a blackboard exercise. It will then at once become apparent what direction reform was taking. Note, however, the weakness of the executive and the reason for it, i. e., the Greek jealousy of individual or continued power. Show how the tyranny of Peisistratos was almost the inevitable result of this weakness of the executive. The exclusion of foreign (even Greek) settlers from citizenship, save in exceptional cases, was entirely contrary to our ideas. And the existence of slavery in the person of captives in war and of poor debtors was a fatal blot on the democracy and the welfare of Athens, as of all the Greek States. The social struggle, with its various mitigations of the lot of the very poor parallels the political strife. Our children are breathing in from the papers and from current discussions the idea that our social inequalities and our contest between capital and labor are a new phenomenon. They ought to learn that such contest is almost world old. We have new elements such as the vast individual fortune and the part taken by the corporations, both unknown in old Greece, but the essential features of the struggle were the same. And the tendency of twenty-four hundred years ago as well as of to-day was and is to give larger right and opportunity to the common man.

Some school historians and teachers decry the effort to mingle with the political history any study of Greek art. But to the writer’s mind that would be a robbery of the children. Our modern life is so saturated with things almost purely Greek in origin that our budding citizens, who may never get elsewhere a glimpse of the origins of so much that is beautiful, ought surely to get such glimpses now.

In towns large enough to contain varied examples the teacher can show the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian styles by going with his classes to the buildings illustrative of each, or at least by telling where such may be found. In the smaller towns pictures of famous buildings may be used. (Remember that the dome is not Greek, but Roman.) In like manner the poetry of the Greeks may be used. The epic, the elegy, the lyric and their great exemplars call for mention. The drama comes a little later. Meter appears to have been of Greek origin. Some of its distinctions are worth a few minutes. And here is opportunity for correlation with the work in English literature. Our poetic forms go back to the people we are studying now. A recent writer makes the caustic comment that with most teachers correlation is “a poor relation.” Rightly viewed, it would appear that no subject better than history furnishes the opportunity for side lights on other branches of the student’s work. For here we get the beginnings of so many things that are commonplaces with us. But they were new once, and so many of the choicest of them had their birth in the little land and among the wonderful people of our present study.

The difference between a good history teacher and a poor one lies largely in the skill and purpose of the former in making his work vivid. Vividness is best secured by a comparison of these ancient conditions with our own. And it is a scholastic crime that a child should be allowed to run away with such a notion as this: that at Salamis the “Greek forts on the shore bombarded the Persian fleet and saved the day”; or that “the Persians steamed away in despair.” These are real examples. Such a child needs waking up. Ask him if he knows what a “Marathon runner” is, and show that by means of such runners the place of the telegraph in our modern life was taken. Pictures may be made of great service. Teachers in our great centers, who have their own history rooms, with their proper apparatus and adornments, have a great advantage here; but humbler means, like the Perry pictures, are available by all.

A topic often neglected is the Carthaginian invasion of Sicily. That was part of an age-long struggle between a great commercial empire and the peoples of different races whose main idea was not commercial supremacy. Punic trader and Spartan soldier have left small mark in the temple of fame. Yet not long ago I heard one of our modern iconoclastic historians sharply question whether it might not have been better for the world in the end if Carthage had beaten both Greek and Roman.

Doubtless trade plays a larger part in political development than many people think. And desire for trade and wealth was a great motive in the upbuilding of the Athenian empire out of the Delian League. It is a shady chapter, like many another island annexation. Similarly it may be said that our spoiling the Dutch of New Netherland was questionable. Yet but for that we might have had no United States. Politically speaking, out of evil good has come. It was the half-pirated wealth of Venice that led to her artistic glory. So the wealth and the political pre-eminence that Athens gained out of the Delian League gave her genius means and scope for its perfect flowering in the age of Pericles. And that will bring us to our next chapter.

---

C. B. NEWTON, Editor.

III. ADVANCE AND RETROGRESSION; THE HUNDRED YEARS’ WAR.

Progress is the keynote of the period we have now reached. The rise of the House of Commons, extending over the last of the thirteenth and first of the fourteenth centuries, the great laws of Edward I’s reign, the growth of commerce, the national spirit induced by the national triumphs at Crecy and Poitiers are some of the larger landmarks in the forward march of the English nation during the hundred years following Henry III. Even the troubled years which followed the black death, the upheavals in society and religion in the latter fourteenth century, were the throes of progress. Then, but for the brief glories of Henry V, comes a time of halting—the miserable end of the long and useless conflict with France, the turbulence and lawlessness of the baronage, the weakness of the king, all combine to bring about a period of retrogression, when the pulse of the nation beats low and the tides of progress were stayed. Soon the purging bloodshed of the Wars of the Roses and the strong hand of the Tudors started once more the healthy growth which had been checked. Some such general survey, presented, perhaps on the blackboard by a line of the kind used to indicate seismic disturbances, or given in some brief direct notes taken down verbatim, will serve as a clearer of the atmosphere, an indicator of the trend of things during this difficult period.

I say “difficult” because I find myself, when I reach the great reign of his Majesty Edward I, ’twixt a veritable Scylla and Charybdis, past whom I steer with annual apprehension. I know I must take a middle course, but I have not yet satisfied myself that I have found the best channel for the precious cargo that I carry. Scylla is the danger of too little detail, the devouring monster of over-definiteness; Charybdis is the equal danger of too much detail, the menace of the minutiæ which defeat their own purpose, and confound in the whirlpool of mental confusion.

Let me explain more concretely. The origin and development of the House of Commons is a highly important subject. It behooves me to impress its history as lucidly and forcibly as may be upon my class. But it is a subject beset with obscurities and difficult to make clear to an immature mind. I may ignore all the obscurities and the conflicting details, and may simply emphasize the principal landmarks—the first inclusion of the “commons” in Simon de Montfort’s parliament of 1265; the cementing of Simon’s innovation in the Model Parliament of 1295, and the separation of the upper and lower Houses early in Edward III’s reign. This is the method of some of the older text-books. It is clear cut, simple, definite. But is it true? Certainly not unqualifiedly no. My love of truth warns me that I must not make it so definite, so conveniently cut and dried, so absolute if I am to convey the historical facts. On the other hand, suppose I resolve to go into more strictly accurate detail. Shall I call forth the note-books and painstakingly explain that representatives of the shires were first summoned by King John in 1213; that two knights from each shire were called to parliament in 1254; that in 1261 three knights were summoned; in 1264, four; in 1265, two knights and two burgesses; in 1275, two knights; but that the practice of summoning knights of the shire and citizens of the towns did not become in any sense continuous till 1295? If I do this, I must go further and try to give some of the reasons for this desultory and varying practice, and before I am done, I have made a fine muddle in my pupils’ heads! I have shipwrecked both interest and comprehension, and I am not much nearer conveying truth than I would have been by the former method. So, too, I must beware of giving or allowing the impression that parliament was in any sense a legislative body at this period, and at the same time I must have a care lest in trying to explain its functions not always too clear to the more advanced scholar, I explain too much and mislead where I would enlighten.

The same difficulty presents itself in the effort to give the gist of the great laws of Edward I and of Edward III. Some of these laws are very hard to express simply; some of them were enacted over and over again. Yet the principles for which they stood, and their subsequent effects can hardly be overlooked. Again, as in the case of the House of Commons, I must be definite and simple, and yet not too definite or too simple.

Of course, this is nothing more than the problem of selection which confronts historians and teachers at many points, but rather more persistently at some points than others. There is no patent solution for the problem, but I believe it helps immensely to be thoroughly alive to it, and to keep two principles steadily in mind when we find the difficulty particularly acute—(1) that strong meat is not for babes, and that the finer points of a discussion such as that which concerns the growth of the lower branch of parliament should be reserved for university work; (2) that though truth may be better subserved by bringing out essentials clearly, even with over-emphasis, yet it is possible to suggest qualifications which will leave loopholes for further modification. For instance, the parliaments of 1265 and 1295 may be emphasized as the first and second steps in the beginning of the House of Commons, yet it may be explained that as early as John’s reign knights of the shire were occasionally summoned to parliament.

I have dwelt at some length on this subject because, self-evident as it may seem, it is full of pitfalls which only the utmost vigilance will avoid.

Fortunately there is plenty of stirring action to offset the tedium (to boys and girls) of laws and parliaments. Bannockburn, Crecy, Poitiers, Agincourt—what an array of names to conjure with! Let us not be parsimonious, fellow teachers, when we reach these vantage grounds of glory! Let us not be ultra-orthodox in our scientific view of history. In the reaction, the very proper reaction from the view of history which made it a mere record of wars and battles there is danger of making it a valley of dry bones. After all, it is the record of life, and the events which have stirred the imagination and aroused the patriotism of millions are not to be too lightly set aside. Let the young imagination “drink delight of battle with its peers”; let it see what was really noble as well as what was base in chivalry. Surely it is worth while that it should catch the life and color of those middle ages—so different, yet after all so human. Froissart has given us this in a form now easily accessible, or failing a complete edition of his “Chronicles,” Cheyney’s “Readings” furnish a taste (pp. 233-249), but hardly enough, for only Crecy is here described. Green, as usual, is vivid in his battle accounts—Bannockburn, pp. 213 and 214; Crecy, Calais, and Poitiers, pp. 225-230; and Agincourt, pp. 267-268. Henry V’s speech in Shakespeare’s play of “Henry V” is too splendid in its rhetoric to be overlooked. Sometimes a laggard in the class loves to declaim, and may be stirred to some interest by such a speech. Here is the chance to make him useful.

And then the story of Joan of Arc, with its unspeakable beauty and pathos, comes as a noble climax, a spiritual contrast, to the series of events the glamour of which is at best of the earth earthy in comparison with the life and death of the Maid. Gardiner’s “Student’s History” contains a very concise account of her life, pp. 310-312. The extracts from contemporary writings, pp. 289-296 of Cheyney’s “Readings” are very interesting and illuminating. Green’s account, pp. 274-279, is vivid, especially the story of her trial and death, p. 279. Reference to the great performance given in the Harvard Stadium last June by Maud Adams would add reality and interest to the study of Joan of Arc. An interesting account of this, with pictures, may be found in “Current Literature” for August, 1909, pp. 196-199.

For a very interesting detailed account of the beginnings of the House of Commons, see the extended quotation from Stubbs’s “Select Charters” in Beard’s “Introduction,” pp. 124-157.

In discussing the “black death” and its effects, it is worth while to point out the revolution wrought by modern medicine and sanitation to which is due the absence of such plagues from modern Europe. The “bubonic plague,” which still devastates India, is much like the “black death,” and the failure of the English to exterminate it in India is due to the superstitious dread and suspicion with which the natives regard all efforts toward inoculation, segregation and disinfection. In the “Readings,” pp. 255-257, is a contemporary account of the plague which not only paints it realistically, but shows its effects on labor.

---

ALBERT H. SANFORD, Editor.

THE CORRELATION OF AMERICAN HISTORY AND CIVICS.

In the year 1906 a committee of the North Central History Teachers’ Association made an investigation of the relations existing between American History and Civics in secondary schools, their report being printed in the Proceedings of that date. A portion of the report consisted of an outline showing the possibility of correlating many topics in these two subjects. In response to numerous requests this portion of the report is here re-printed. In their conclusions, the committee recommended correlation as far as this is feasible; but they emphasized the fact that many important topics in Civics would not be adequately treated by this method, and hence should be taught separately. The arguments supporting this and other conclusions are to be found in the full report referred to above. The committee consisted of the following: Albert H. Sanford, Carl Russell Fish, Mildred Hinsdale, C. C. Bebout, and Mary Louise Childs.

An Outline Showing the Correlation of American History with Civics.

(1) COLONIAL HISTORY.

It is not intended that the Civics topics stated above shall be treated exhaustively; the mere fact of the existence of the organizations that correspond to the colonial types is the extent of the correlation at this point. (Reasons for this restriction will be stated later.) The important thing is that the pupil be taught not to associate these institutions exclusively with the localities in which they originated, but to regard them as the typical forms of organization of those different elements of our population which they carried, or rather under which they marched, westward.

(2) REVOLUTIONARY AND CRITICAL PERIODS.

It will be noticed in (1) and (2) that the comparisons are between particular facts of our history and some of the more general features of our National government. The details of present conditions may not be understood by students who have not studied Civics separately.

(3) CONSTITUTIONAL PERIOD.

Under the topics that follow, we find the history of our present National government, seen in the formation of the Constitution and the workings of the government thus formed. The natural correlation, then, is between the event (either in the Constitutional Convention or in our later history) and that part of the Constitution which thus came about, or which forms the basis for the action of the government described.

The historical topics are not arranged in strictly chronological order, but in the sequence in which they are usually treated. In most cases no mention has been made of events which show the working of the government under a clause of the Constitution that has once been included; for instance, not all the important treaties of our history are mentioned. Enough attention should be devoted to the clause when first mentioned to fix it in the mind of the pupil. In some instances, however, there is repetition of this kind, particularly where the interpretation has changed from time to time.

---

WALTER H. CUSHING, Editor.

The Oxford Summer School has two souls. The student feels the influence of each from the moment he enters the examination halls—nay, as he hurries down High Street, “the glorious High Street,” which Wordsworth’s sonnet has enshrined. In spite of the groups of foreigners talking together in their mother tongues as they too hasten towards the meeting, in spite of the single women who wear English boots, and speak with the English gentlewoman’s mellifluous voice, in spite of tall blonde German students arguing vociferously but good-naturedly, in spite of the whole one thousand three hundred men and women, who are gathering together for another renewed quickening in modern thought along educational lines, one feels a throng of ghosts pressing in upon him—ghosts of memories which surge as really as does the crowd itself. One feels the spirit of To-day and To-morrow taking hold of him and the spirit of Yesterday whispering in his ears. One should be Janus-faced in Oxford, for the soul of the Past and the soul of Now beckon each in its own way. One cannot turn a corner of the high walls, or pass through a gateway, or wander through a cloister, without feeling the ineffable beauty of the past, the intangible glory of the days of Wolsey and Cranmer and Cromwell and Reginald Pole, or the later gorgeousness of Charles I and the army of Royalists who held high carnival here before their downfall. Men who have made modern thought possible, poets, essayists, historians, scientists, one touches the influence of their work at every step, as well as meeting them face to face from their portraits upon the walls of college banqueting halls or chapter houses. Everywhere one feels even a still greater power, the ecclesiastical domination, which in early days peopled this glorious city with its monks, friars, priests and bishops. One’s imaginations runs riot as he peers from a cloister walk, when the chimes are jangling. He all but sees the Benedictine Friars, and he does not need to await their coming across the soft, velvety green, under the spreading limes, or oaks, they are there, their breviaries in their hands, their heads bowed.

But while the student conjures up the men who made Oxford in the thirteenth, and fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, the men of the twentieth century are pressing against him with human force, and he finds himself crossing High Street once more with the surging crowd. He has learned to differentiate the members of the school still further. This group are Swedes; and another Danes; those men, with a scattering of women, are Socialists; the bevy of black-eyed, red-cheeked girls come from France; they are trying in three weeks to rub up their convent English. Then there are so many round-faced, round-bodied German fraus, the embodiment of comfortableness, who have come over with their theoretical husbands. And surely some of these German students seem to need just such “help-mates” to keep them attached to earth. As one sits in the gallery of the Sheldonian Theater one almost feels that a map of the social world lies below, and that the little groups of persons are types of the great nations themselves: the eager nations of Europe and America, the live nations which are searching after the solution of world-problems.

The Oxford Summer School of 1909 has undertaken to present courses in three major subjects: the contribution of medieval and modern Italy to world-civilization is its history course. In economics the discussion of industrial problems and trades-unions is drawing together large audiences, and arousing intense interest. Methods of education which shall bring a quickening to the professional world itself is a third line of thought. In connection with the historical course, the literature, science and art each finds a large place. Perhaps no former summer school has offered a more concrete and wisely-arranged program than that of this year’s summer meeting in Oxford. The delegacy has so arranged the courses that an intensity of thought gives an opportunity for most remarkable concentration in data. Three weeks is but a very short time for one to attend lectures, especially if the lectures are scattering, a subject here and a subject there. But this concentration of interest upon medieval and modern Italy, this intensive study of Dante and his contemporaries, this presentation of Italian thought, government and politics, as well as Italian art and society, give a continuity and a rounding out to the subject presented.

To illustrate the wisdom of the delegacy. The summer meeting was opened by an address by the Italian Ambassador, Marquis Di Guiliano, and from the opening words of this Italian diplomat to the present writing, the summer meeting has kept to the thought which the orator himself presented, our inheritance from Italy.

A word in regard to the delegacy. The official heads are the vice-chancellor of the university and the proctors, together with the secretary, Prof. J. A. R. Marriott, M.A., who, with his assistant secretary, Miss E. M. Gunter, are the active members of the delegates, who number twenty and represent the colleges of the university. The summer meeting is divided into two parts: First part from July 30 to August 11, and the second from August 11 to 23. The tuition for the two parts is but £1.10 and working men and women may obtain the above tickets at half price under certain conditions. Not only are the courses so arranged that the students may select companion subjects out of these two sections and focus their interests upon special work, but the work itself is so outlined and printed that syllabi may be obtained for almost nothing. Thus the student has a guide of thought with him at every lecture, as well as something to carry away. Among the great men who are lecturing at the summer meeting are the Rev. W. Hudson Shaw, already well known in the United States; A. L. Smith, Ford lecturer in English History; E. L. S. Horsburgh, B.A., whose discussions on economic problems are holding together conservative theorists and advanced Socialists in remarkable fashion, as he presents the topics relating to industrial problems. George N. Trevelyan, Rev. W. K. Stride, R. V. Leonard and Edmund Gardner are here, and other men whose manuals are also famous. Perhaps the lectures on Dante by the Rev. P. H. Wicksteed draw the largest audiences, but the great class-rooms of the examination schools are filled to over-flowing in almost every case, so enthusiastic are the students. One might throw in parenthesis here that the undergraduate calls these enthusiastic summer students “stretchers” (another word for extensionists).

It would be impossible to compare an American Summer School with the Summer School at Oxford. I have attempted to write only the first impressions that one gains in this university town. Each traveller gains a different impression doubtless, and in order to gain that impression he must come himself. My last word, therefore, to my reader is not to remember my impressions, but to plan to visit Oxford and gain his own impression, and his own individual quickening.

Mabel Hill,
Normal School, Lowell, Mass.

Oxford, England, Aug. 4, 1909.

A group of about fifty history teachers, representing the grades, the high school, and the university, and living in the vicinity of San Francisco, have formed the habit of gathering informally at luncheon from time to time, to meet socially and to discuss questions of professional interest. At the last meeting. September 18, the topic was “The Practical Value of History.” Prof. J. N. Powman opened with a stimulating essay, and was followed by a general discussion.

These meetings are useful in enabling history teachers of various grades to learn what each other man is doing, and to discover common aims. It is planned to continue them at intervals of about three months.

---

REVIEWED BY GEORGE H. GASTON.

In beginning his book, Dr. Brown shows that the modern high school is the third stage in the evolution of secondary education in the United States; the first being the Latin grammar school of colonial times, and the second the academy flourishing between the Revolution and the Civil War. He makes it clear that the high school was the natural consequence of the developing political, social and industrial ideas of the period. Its popularity is shown by its phenomenal growth in fifty years.

Its function as now established is well made one of the most important chapters of the book, for it is the conception of purpose that must determine its entire development, as well as the measure of its usefulness. In its relation to the elementary school it is essentially continuation and co-operation, accompanied by the many changes suited to adolescence. Having at first no vital relation to the college, it is conceded that it should prepare for State universities, where such exist, and for colleges generally, but it must also serve the best interests of those not going to college. From the peculiar nature of our republic, its function to the pupil is of such a nature and must in such a manner be discharged that culture, habits of industry, a healthy civic spirit and increased social efficiency will be some of the many rewards for the great and increasing expenditure by the State.

Following logically the function of the high school, is the discussion of the educational value of the different studies. Tradition has prevented until recently any such scientific examination of the studies pursued in the high school. As to their value in accomplishing the aim of education as he conceives it, the author gives his estimate of the various classes of subjects from the standpoint of information, power, character, social value, etc., and constructs definite programs proceeding from this study.

In the organization and management of the high school there are many real problems found in all, but their relative importance varies with the size of the school. The preparation of the teacher, his selection and efficient supervision are some of the most important considerations in working toward the standards of the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools here produced and representing the most advanced practical thought concerning the essentials of a good high school.

Although not neglecting material equipment with all it means in a modern high school, it is gratifying to find it completely subordinated to the living, active side of the institution, the teacher, the principal and the pupil. His treatment of principal and of pupil reveals true pedagogical insight and genuine sympathy, but it is the teacher for whom he cherishes such advanced ideals of academic and professional training, of personality, and of experience, that he characterizes as “by all odds, the most influential factor in high school education.”

The real heart and life of the school is reached in the keen and suggestive discussions of the class exercise, character-forming government, and the recently-conceived possibilities of social development, with its numerous and serious problems, one of which only is the secret society.

There is inspiration in the high ideals of the relations between high school and community. For many reasons given, it is a timely topic for teachers and parents, and when even partially realized will aid in the solution of present problems and help to determine future development, two questions, whose impartial and fundamental treatment is a real stimulus and a safe guide.

This book deserves wide reading for many reasons. It is encouraging in spirit, but fearless in criticism, which is everywhere constructive; its style is simple and direct throughout, thus adapting itself to the attention of parents and school boards as well as the profession; it deals with questions vital to both large and small schools; its bibliographies and illustrative material in the appendices are pilots on a vast sea; and a careful reading will result in a greatly-increased faith in the present high value and the boundless future possibilities which the author cherishes in such large measure for the American high school.

[“The American High School.” By John Franklin Brown, Ph.D. The Macmillan Co., 1909.]

---

NOTES.

Professor Henry L. Cannon, of Leland Stanford Junior University, has in preparation for early publication by Ginn & Co. a book of reading references for English history, in which upon a great many topics of English history he will give references to over fifteen hundred books upon English history.

Professor Allen C. Thomas, of Haverford College, is preparing for publication by D. C. Heath & Co. a new text-book in English history, which will follow the principles already applied by the author in his School History of the United States.

Mrs. Schuyler Van Rensselaer has published through the Macmillan Co. the first part of her comprehensive work upon the history of the city of New York. The first two volumes deal with the history of the city in the seventeenth century.

---

---

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine.

I am very much pleased with the Magazine. I hope that there may be a chance in it for discussion of the course of study of history for the secondary school. This will not transgress the work of any committee, as the Committee of Five was to deal with Ancient History for admission to college. A. E. D.

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine.

What reasons would you give to a beginner in history for studying the subject? What reasons would you give to an advanced pupil? S. S. F.

Ans.—Answers to this question will be found in any of the manuals upon the teaching of history, such as those by Bourne, McMurray, Hinsdale, and in the Report of the Committee of Seven. An excellent summary of the reasons, together with references to extended treatment of the subject, will be found in Professor Franklin L. Riley’s “Syllabus on the Teaching of History,” privately printed by himself at University, Miss. (price 25c.).

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine.

We are studying the history of Greece, and I want little maps on leaflets so that each one can be familiar with the geographical location of each country, city, or town, as we study it. Can you refer me to any such series? D. C. A.

Ans.—Murray’s classical maps will be found serviceable for such purposes. They can be bought at a low price, and will amply repay the cost.

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine.

I have just been examining The History Teacher’s Magazine. Would like to ask if you know of a similar magazine for the grades. Can you also advise me as to the best reference books for the grades in that subject? A. V.

Ans.—(1) There is no magazine devoted solely to the teaching of history in the grades. History, as well as other subjects, is treated in “The Teacher’s Magazine” and in the “School Review.” History in the grades will be given an increasingly important position in our own magazine.

(2) The best reference book upon the teaching of history in the grades is the report of the Committee of Eight, mentioned in several places in this issue of the Magazine. Miss Sarah A. Dynes has in preparation a book upon the subject.

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine.

I would like to add my tribute to the remarkable value of the new Magazine for us history teachers. I am delighted that you recognize the importance of American government as worthy of a place of its own in your paper. We teachers of civics, who have been struggling for years to give this valuable subject a place in the curriculum just because a certain group of colleges and universities have persisted in refusing it college entrance credit, rejoice when public recognition is thus bestowed upon our subject. We return with fresh interest and courage to our efforts to teach the principles of citizenship to the boys and girls under our charge. As the basic idea of our course is citizenship, I confess I much prefer the term “Civics” to “American Government,” in spite of Professor Schaper’s contempt for such designation. It gives me a much broader basis for my work than the narrower term. M. L. C.

HISTORICAL SOURCES IN PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOLS.

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine:

The article in the September issue of The History Teacher’s Magazine entitled “One Use of Sources in the Teaching of History” is interesting both in its point of view and in the concrete illustration of the method presented by Professor Fling. The “methods” pursued by different teachers of history will vary largely and chiefly in consonance with the respectively dissimilar aims held in mind by the teachers. I must own that an experience of ten years in teaching history in the high schools of New York City has engendered a more modest purpose than that avowed by Professor Fling; my own aim is less ambitious than his and at the same time, perhaps, more comprehensive; it may not be, like his, based upon “my conception of educational theory and of the logic of historical science”; it is, however, based upon a first-hand knowledge of the intellectual attainments and limitations of girls and boys of high school age.

There is, of course, a great difference in mental power between pupils during the time devoted to Greek history and during that in which they are studying American history and civics; there are, too, great disparities in the children of the same grades and in different schools, and yet I think it is a safe generalization to declare that broadly speaking, our pupils are surprisingly immature and undeveloped mentally, even when, as “sweet girl graduates,” or their brothers, they leave us for the struggle of life, or for college.

The public high school, supported as it is by the money of the people, must necessarily adapt itself to the needs of the children sent to it; the vast majority of our pupils receive from us the “finishing touches” of their formal education, as they do not go to college, but plunge at once into “the world.” Such being the fact, what then should be the aim of the history teacher? Should it be to inculcate “the methodical search for truth,” using the phrase in the sense evidently intended by both M. Lanson and Professor Fling?

Remembering the specific task set before us, viz.: insofar as we are able, to fit our charges to grapple with the practical problems of life, I am compelled to say that such a training in the study of history as Professor Fling thinks desirable for high school pupils would be woefully one-sided and inadequate.

We are not expected to train historians nor historical specialists; we leave to the colleges to discover unusual natural aptitudes for investigation and research, and we consider that in the universities the post-graduate school finds its sphere in the training of the historical expert; on the other hand, to the high school is given the privilege of introducing these younger minds into the domain of history. And while enforcing the importance of accuracy and exactness in thinking and in forming judgments of men and of events, it is not only our task to inculcate “the methodical search for truth,” but to throw open to the pupils the literature of the subject, to show them how to use books to arouse their interest in scenes and countries removed by time and space from themselves, to create, too, an interest in the social life of times present and past, and to inspire a sane spirit of pride in our country and loyalty to it.

The proper use of “Sources” for the accomplishment of these results is not, then, as I have come to think, in setting such lessons as Professor Fling suggests in the instance of the Battle of Salamis; personally I rarely place in the hands of pupils any sources. I have had few classes of sufficient maturity of mind to profit by such a course. I do, however, read and explain to them such sources as I think will serve to add reality, freshness and life to the text. Contrary to Professor Fling, I think that the only place for the “Sources” is in the hands of the teacher and not in those of the pupils; I do not believe in the so-called “Source Method” of history teaching in secondary schools; it is unsuited to the mental capacity of the pupils and contributes only indirectly to what I consider the aims that should control our teaching of history.

One remark made by Professor Fling is almost naïve. He says: “Two exercises a week would be enough for intensive critical work.” Yes, it probably would be; especially in Greek and Roman history, which in our New York high schools is taught but three times a week; it certainly would be sufficient in English history in those of our schools in which it is taught but twice a week; and probably it would be sufficient in American history and civics, which is taught four times a week!

Charles R. Fay,
Erasmus Hall High School,
Borough of Brooklyn,
New York City.

Editor History Teacher’s Magazine:

The library or the laboratory method of teaching history and literature has been generally adopted. This method has some difficulties that need to be overcome or the method will fail and consequently be abandoned. I believe that the method must be a failure in many schools. Dr. MacDonald has written a letter to the “Nation,” October 7, about the inadequate equipment for teaching history and literature in universities and colleges. In teaching science, suitable apparatus must be made for every four pupils. In teaching history and literature in a high school, reference books ought to be provided every four pupils in the same subject. The difficulty in teaching history in the high school is greater than in teaching science, as pupils pursuing different subjects, as ancient history, medieval history and modern history, often need the same reference books. If pupils are required to read four hundred pages, more or less, in some history other than the school text, a pupil may average about fifty pages a month. But not more than ten per cent. of the number can get the books required for this reading.

I think the whole system is wrong. No definite number of pages should be required. Instead of this plan, topics should be assigned to be gotten up and written in note-books. Suppose the topic should be, “Trace the course of the Visigoths from Adrianople till they blend with the Spanish people”; or, “Give a narrative account of Napoleon’s Russian campaign, accompanied with suitable maps.” The preparation of these topics may require the reading of two hundred or more pages. Each pupil, during the year, should prepare not less than four such topics. This work for all our pupils will fill twenty-five thousand pages of note-book work. This is too much reading and correcting for our teachers. Therefore, the teachers ought not to undertake to read and correct the note-books. They ought, however, to inspect them. Each topic should he headed with a summary, and with a statement of authorities used. I think that an oral narration of the written work should be made by some pupil or by more than one pupil, and a criticism or discussion by members of the class should be made.

I shall be glad to have the views of others on this important subject. I have confined what I have written to teaching history. The teaching of literature will require a different plan.

R. H. Parham.
Librarian, High School, Little Rock, Ark.

---

---

---

---

---