Jesuit Education/Chapter 4

by Robert Schwickerath

 

Chapter IV.

The Ratio Studiorum of 1599.

The number of colleges of the Society grew very rapidly. Colleges were opened during the life-time of St. Ignatius, at Messina, Palermo, Naples, and other towns in Italy; at Gandia, Salamanca, Valencia, Alcala, Burgos, Valladolid, and Saragossa in Spain; at Lisbon in Portugal; at Vienna in Austria; and at Billom in France. After the death of the first General (1556), many more colleges were added to. the list, especially in those parts of Germany and the Netherlands which had remained faithful to the Catholic Church. Thus Ingolstadt, Cologne, Prague, Tyrnau (Hungary) were opened in 1556, Munich 1559, Treves 1560, Innsbruck and Mentz 1561, etc.^[1] In Belgium Audenarde 1566, Douay 1568, Bruges 1571, Antwerp 1575, Liége 1582, etc. But the Society possessed as yet no uniform system of education; the colleges in the various countries at first followed, more or less, the systems prevailing there, not however, without improving the existing methods according to the general principles of the fourth part of the Constitutions. Still, it would be altogether wrong to suppose that the Ratio Studiorum, or Plan of Studies, drawn up 1584-1599, was the first important document of its kind. The recent historical researches of the Spanish Jesuits have shed much new light on this question.^[2] These Fathers have published in 1901-1902 many important documents on the educational methods of the Society, drawn up before 1584. Three documents especially exhibit three complete "Plans of Studies." The first was written by Father Jerome Nadal (Latinized Natalis), probably between 1548-1552, during the life-time of St. Ignatius. Nadal was well fitted for drawing up a plan of studies. Possessed of great talent and a singular prudence, he had made excellent studies in the University of Paris. Appointed Rector of the new College at Messina, in 1548, he wrote his treatise De Studiis Societatis Jesu, the first plan of studies of the Society known thus far.^[3] The second is an adaptation of Father Nadal 's plan which was sent from Messina to the Roman College.^[4] The most important is the third, written by Father Ledesma. This distinguished scholar had studied in the Universities of Alcala, Paris and Louvain. Immediately after his entrance into the Society, in 1557, he taught in the Roman College until his death, in 1575. As Prefect of Studies in this college, he drew up a plan of studies which practically contains, at least in outline, all points which were later on laid down in the Ratio Studiorum concerning classical studies.^[5] Besides these three documents there are extant fragments of plans of studies of various colleges in Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, and Germany.^[6]

With the increase of the colleges, the want of a uniform system for the whole Society was felt more and more. Teachers and superiors of schools and provinces asked more urgently for the plan of studies which St. Ignatius had promised in the Constitutions. The final completion of the educational system was reserved to the fifth General of the Order, Father Claudius Aquaviva, who governed the Society from 1581-1615. His Generalate was a most stormy, but at the same time the most brilliant, epoch in the history of the Order. It was the glorious time of the English and Japanese martyrs; the time when the great missions in Japan, China, and Brazil began to flourish; the time in which learned men like Bellarmine, Suarez, Maldonatus, Toletus, deLugo, Vasquez, Molina, Lessius, a Lapide, Peter Canisius, Clavius, and a host of other writers not only added lustre to the Society, but were held to be the foremost scholars of the age and the most renowned champions of the Catholic Church.

In 1584, Father Aquaviva called to Rome six experienced schoolmen, who had been elected from different nationalities and provinces, in order that the peculiarities of the various nations might be considered in the formation of a system which was destined to be put to practice in so many countries all over the world. These men worked for about a year, consulting authors on education, examining the regulations and customs of universities and colleges, especially those of the Roman College, and the letters, observations, and other documents sent to Rome from the various provinces. The standard which guided these men in their deliberations was the fourth part of the Constitutions. In 1585 they presented the result of their labor to the General.^[7] In 1586, Father Aquaviva sent the report to the provinces; and at the same time ordered that in each province at least five men of eminent learning and experience should examine the report, first in private, then in common, and should send the result of their examination to Rome.

How much liberty was granted in these remarks on the educational methods then prevailing in the Order, may be seen from the verdict given by James Pontanus (his German name was Spanmiller), one of the ablest classic scholars of the Society. He boldly censures some abuses, especially that sometimes young men were employed in teaching who were not sufficiently prepared for the work; men who were not well grounded in Greek; that too frequent changes occurred among teachers, etc. He deplores the fact that too much weight is laid on physics, metaphysics, and dialectics, and that the humanistic studies are not valued as they deserve. "Without classical education," he says, "the other branches of study are cold, dumb and dead; classical learning gives these other studies life, breath, motion, blood and language." Pontanus' memorandum was by no means free from exaggerations and unwarranted generalizations of single instances. But it is interesting to see how freely opinions could be uttered on a question of such importance.^[8]

The notes and suggestions sent from the different provinces were examined by the most prominent Professors of the Roman College and three members of the committee of 1584-85, and then were used in drawing up a second plan. This new plan, after having been revised by the General and his Assistants, was sent to the provinces in 1591 as Ratio atque Institutio Studiorum, the editio princeps of the Ratio. The Provincials who came to Rome for the fifth General Congregation (1593-94), again reported on the results of the plan as practised during the last years, and demanded some changes. At length, in 1599, when every possible effort had been made, when theory and practice alike had been consulted, and every advisable modification had been added, the final plan of studies appeared under the title: Ratio atque Institutio Studiorum Societatis Jesu (Naples 1599), usually quoted as Ratio Studiorum. Well could it be said that this Ratio was "the fruit of many prayers, of long and patient efforts, and the result of the combined wisdom of the whole Order." It has sometimes been said that the word Ratio Studiorum is a misnomer, as it does not propose any educational principles. However, as Father Eyre, S. J., years ago has pointed out,^[9] Ratio, as applied to studies, more naturally means method than principle, and the Ratio Studiorum is essentially a practical method or system of teaching. Hence the name is altogether appropriate.

How easily an author, even without ill will, may be led into mistakes regarding the Ratio Studiorum, can be inferred from the following passage which is found in a Catholic magazine.^[10] "The work which caused the greatest sensation was the Ratio atque Institutio Studiorum Societatis Jesu, published in the College at Rome in 1586. It took nine months to print it. The part bearing on theological opinions raised a storm of opposition among the other religious orders, principally the Dominicans, who denounced it to the Inquisition. The result was that Sixtus V. pronounced against the book, and, in the following editions, the chapter De Opinionum Delectu was omitted." The same mistake is made by Dr. Huber.^[11]

The author of the article was betrayed into making these very inaccurate statements by implicitly trusting Debure (Biographie Instructive, Paris, 1764). The historical truth is established by Father Pachtler,^[12] and by Father Duhr.^[13] The evidence given by Father Pachtler may be summed up as follows:

1. The Ratio of 1586 was in no sense of the word "published", and hence caused no "sensation" whatever. It was only the project or plan of a Ratio, and printed privately for the members of the Order. How it should have taken "nine months to print it," is unintelligible; the error arose probably from misunderstanding the fact, that it took the six fathers who formed the committee, nine months to work out the plan of the Ratio.

2. This first draft, written in the form of dissertations, is now very rare. It is known to exist at present in Trier (Treves), Berlin, Milan, and Marseilles. Father Pachtler has for the first time reprinted it entirely from the copy found in the city library at Trier (located in the former Jesuit College).

3. This private document was not "denounced to the Inquisition," but was wrongfully seized by the "Spanish Inquisition," at the instance of the Spanish Dominicans, set on by some disloyal Spanish Jesuits who were soon after expelled from the Society.

4. As soon as the seizure was reported to Rome, Father Aquaviva complained directly to Pope Sixtus V. This energetic Pope, formerly a Franciscan and by no means partial to the Jesuits, far from "pronouncing against the book," became highly incensed at the action of the Spanish Inquisition, and wrote a characteristic dispatch to his nuncio in Spain, inclosing a letter to the Cardinal Grand Inquisitor Quiroga, and bidding the nuncio deliver the letter to the Cardinal only after having read it to him. In this letter the masterful Pontiff commands Quiroga, in virtue of his apostolic power, forthwith to restore to the Society the book of the Institute (which had also been seized), and especially the Ratio Studiorum. And unless he obeyed this command, the Pope threatened to depose him at once from the office of Grand Inquisitor, and strip him of the dignity of Cardinal.^[14]

5. The second draft of the Ratio was sent to the Provinces in 1591. In this draft the chapter De Opinionum Delectu (i. e. catalogue of philosophical and theological questions which were not to be taught in the Society), was omitted, but was sent out separately for examination in the following year. Hence the statement that in the following editions the chapter De Opinionum Delectu was omitted, is again inaccurate.

6. The final Ratio, including, of course, the Catalogus Quaestionum, was, as we have seen before, promulgated in 1599.^[15]

This final Ratio did not contain any discussions on the educational value of different subjects, nor any treatises why this or that method had been adopted. Such discussions had preceded, and had been contained in the Ratio of 1585.^[16] That of 1599 was a code of laws, a collection of rules for the different officials, in whose hands lies the government of a college, and for the teachers of the various classes. The rules are divided as follows:

I.
Regulae	Provincialis (Provincial Superior).
"	Rectoris (President).
"	Praefecti Studiorum (Prefect or (Superintendent of Studies).

II.
Regulae	Communes omnibus Professoribus Superiorum Facultatum (General regulations for the Professors of theology and philosophy).
"	Professoris	Sacrae Scripturae.
"	"	Linguae Hebraicae.
"	"	Scholasticae Theologiae.
"	"	Historiae Ecclesiasticae.
"	"	Juris Canonici.
"	"	Casuum Conscientiae (Moral Theology).

III.
Regulae	Professoris Philosophiae.
"	"	Philosophiae Moralis (Ethics).
"	"	Physicae (Physics and other natural sciences).[17]
"	"	Mathematicae.
IV.
Regulae	Praefecti Studiorum Inferiorum (together with regulations for written examinations and for awarding prizes).
Regulae	Communes Professoribus Classium Inferiorum.
"	Professoris	Rhetoricae.
"	"	Humanitatis.
"	"	Supremae Classis Grammaticae.
"	"	Mediae
"	"	Infimae

 

Then follow various rules: for the pupils, for the management of academies (literary and debating societies) etc.

The rules under No. I are those of the Superiors.^[18] The entire government of a college is in the hands of the Rector (President). He is also the court of appeal in all disputed questions among the teachers, or between the masters and the students. He is to inspect the classes from time to time, in order to inform himself of the progress of the students, and to give advice to the teachers. As far as possible, he is to take an interest in each pupil personally. Nothing of importance can be undertaken in the college without consulting him, nor can any custom of the house be changed without his consent. The subordinate officials have that amount of authority which he gives them, and they are obliged to report to him frequently on the conditions of affairs in the college. The Rector's power is, however, not absolute; he has to follow the laws laid down for him. Besides he is provided with a Board of Consultors and he is obliged to ask their opinion on all matters of greater moment, although he remains free to follow their advice or to reject it. The teachers have to carry out the decisions of the Rector, but they may always have recourse to the higher Superior, the Provincial. The Provincial visits the colleges at least once a year, and every teacher has to confer with him privately and may lay before him any complaints against the Rector. In this manner, a firm centralized government is ensured, while at the same time any arbitrariness on the part of Superiors is prevented.

Interesting are, in this regard, the words of Father Nadal: "Let the Rector have his ordinary advisers (consultores) and let him hold regular meetings (concilia). One is the meeting of 'languages', in which all teachers of the languages take part; the second of philosophy, and the third of theology. To these meetings the Rector may invite two or three other experienced men, if he thinks it necessary or useful. In order to settle a question concerning languages, or philosophy, or theology, a meeting of the respective professors should be held; if a question concerns the whole institution, a meeting of all professors should be called. However, the Rector is not so bound that he could not do anything without convoking such a meeting. For these meetings are held that he may benefit by their advice. The whole authority and responsibility of the administration rests with him; but every year the Rector shall report to the General about the college, and all officials of the college shall inform the General through sealed letters about the administration by the Rector."^[19]

The chief assistant of the Rector is the Prefect of Studies. To him belongs the direct supervision of the classes and everything connected with instruction. He must be a man of literary and scientific accomplishments and of experience in teaching, so that both teachers and students can have recourse to him with confidence in all questions pertaining to education. It is his duty to assign the students to their proper classes, to determine the matter of examination, and to appoint the examiners, to select the authors to be read during the following scholastic year,^[20] to visit every class at least once in two weeks, to admonish the masters of any defects he notices in their manner of teaching, and to direct them by other useful advice. In all this he is the instrument of the Rector, whom he has to consult in all important matters.

There is another assistant of the Rector, the Prefect of Discipline, who is immediately responsible for all that concerns external order and discipline. From these few details, it will appear that the government of a Jesuit college is, at once, extremely simple and highly efficient.

The regulations contained under No. II are for the theological faculty in universities and seminaries. We have to examine chiefly the last two classes: the regulations for the faculty of Arts or Philosophy, and those for the Studia inferiora or Humanities. These "lower studies" were for the greater part literary and correspond to the classical course of the high school and part of the college. The Ratio Studiorum treated languages, mathematics and sciences not simultaneously, but successively; hence the distinction between Philosophy (Arts) and Studia inferiora.

In the five lower classes – in many places there were six – the classical languages were the staple studies. Other branches, as history and geography, were to be treated as accessories or complements of the literary studies. The task for each grade is expressed in the first rule of the Professor of the respective class.^[21]

Lower Grammar. The aim of this class is a perfect knowledge of the rudiments and elementary knowledge of the syntax. – In Greek: reading, writing, and a certain portion of the grammar. The work used for the prelection,^[22] will be some easy selections from Cicero, besides fables of Phaedrus and Lives of Nepos.

Middle Grammar. The aim is a knowledge, though not entire, of all grammar; and, for the prelection, only the select epistles, narrations, descriptions and the like from Cicero, with the Commentaries of Caesar, and some of the easiest poems of Ovid. – In Greek: the fables of Aesop, select dialogues of Lucian, the Tablet of Cebes.

Upper Grammar. The aim is a complete knowledge of grammar, including all the exceptions and idioms in syntax, figures and rhetoric, and the art of versification. – In Greek: the eight parts of speech, or all the rudiments. For the lessons: in prose, the most important epistles of Cicero, the books, De Amicitia, De Senectute, and others of the kind, or even some of the easier orations; in poetry, some select elegies and epistles of Ovid, also selection from Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, and the Eclogues of Virgil, or some of Virgil's easier books, as the fourth book of the Georgics, or the fifth and seventh books of the Aeneid. – In Greek: St. Chrysostom, Aesop, and the like.

Humanities. The aim is to prepare, as it were, the ground for eloquence, which is done in three ways: by a knowledge of the language, some erudition, and a sketch of the precepts pertaining to rhetoric. For a command of the language, which consists chiefly in acquiring propriety of expression and fluency, the one prose author employed in daily prelections is Cicero; as historical writers, Caesar, Sallust, Livy, Curtius, and others of the kind; the poets used are, first of all, Virgil; also odes of Horace, with the elegies, epigrams and other productions of illustrious poets, expurgated; in like manner orators, historians, and poets, in the vernacular (1832). The erudition conveyed should be slight, and only to stimulate and recreate the mind, not to impede progress in learning the tongue. The precepts will be the general rules of expression and style, and the special rules on the minor kinds of composition, epistles, narrations, descriptions, both in verse and prose. – In Greek: the art of versification, and some notions of the dialects; also a clear understanding of authors, and some composition in Greek. The Greek prose authors will be Saints Chrysostom and Basil, epistles of Plato and Synesius, and some selections from Plutarch; the poets: Homer, Phocylides, Theognis, St. Gregory Nazianzen, Synesius, and others like them.

Rhetoric. The grade of this class cannot be easily defined. For it trains to perfect eloquence, which comprises two great faculties, the oratorical and the poetical, the former chiefly being the object of culture; nor does it regard only the practical, but the beautiful also. For the precepts, Cicero may be supplemented with Quintilian and Aristotle. The style, which may be assisted by drawing on the most approved historians and poets, is to be formed on Cicero; all of his works are most fitted for this purpose, but only his speeches should be made the subject of prelection, that the precepts of the art may be seen in practice. – As to the vernacular, the style should be formed on the best authors (1832). The erudition will be derived from the history and manners of nations, from the authority of writers and all learning; but moderately as befits the capacity of the students. – In Greek: the fuller knowledge of authors and of dialects is to be acquired. The Greek authors, whether orators, historians, or poets, are to be ancient and classic: Demosthenes, Plato, Thucydides, Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, and others of the kind, including Saints Nazianzen, Basil, and Chrysostom.

Let it not be imagined, however, that this plan was followed slavishly. The different provinces of the Order made such adaptations and introduced such changes as they thought best for their respective countries. We give here the plan which was followed in the colleges in Upper Germany, in the beginning of the eighteenth century. It is taken from the Ratio et Via of Father Kropf, published in 1736.^[23]

 

Lower Grammar. First Year. (First high school class.)

Latin. Grammar of Alvarez, elements, and easier rules of construction. – Reading: The easiest letters of Cicero, specially selected and separately printed. Selections from book I and II of Father Pontanus' Progymnasmata.^[24]

Greek. Grammar of Father Gretser,^[25] or of Father Bayer.^[26] Correct reading and writing; accents and declensions.

Religion. Small Catechism of Peter Canisius,^[27] part I-II. Explanation of the Latin Gospel.

History. Rudimenta historica,^[28] vol. I., treating chiefly of the history of the people of Israel.

Lower Grammar. Second Year.
(Second high school class.)

Latin. Alvarez' Grammar, book I, part II; repetition of first year's matter; the irregular verb; first part of syntax. – Reading: Select letters of Cicero. Selections from Pontanus' Progymnasmata.

Greek. Grammar: repetition of declensions; comparison of adjectives; pronouns and auxiliary verbs.

Religion. Catechism of Canisius, part I III. Explanation of Latin Gospel.

History. Rudimenta historica, vol. II: The four monarchies (Ancient history).

Middle Grammar.
(Third high school class.)

Latin. Grammar: The whole of syntax; repetition of irregular verbs. – Reading: chiefly Cicero's Epistulae ad Familiares, some parts of the Progymnasmata. The reading of poetical works which is customary in other Jesuit colleges in this class, is not sanctioned in this province.

Greek. Grammar: the verb completed. – As regards reading it is left to the judgment of the Prefect of Studies to prescribe the study of the Greek Catechism or Cebes' Tablet. At all events the pupils should practise the reading of these books from time to time and give an account of their reading.

Religion. Catechism of Canisius and Latin Gospel.

History. Rudimenta historica, vol. III: The Christian Emperors of Rome (Medieval history).

Upper Grammar.
(Fourth high school class.)

Latin. Grammar: the whole of syntax (repeated), rules of construction; rules of prosody. – Reading: Above all, the Letters of Cicero to Atticus and his brother Quintus; De Amicitia, De Senectute, etc. Selections from the Progymnasmata, books II and III. – Selections from Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius; Ovid; Virgil; fourth book of the Georgics; Aeneid, books V and VII.

Greek. First book of Gretser's grammar, except the dialects. – Reading: Chrysostom, Aesop, Agapetus, etc.

Religion. Catechism of Canisius. Greek Gospel.

History. Rudimenta historica, vol. IV: The States of the World (Modern history).

Humanities, (Freshman.)

Latin. Rules of rhetoric from a brief compendium; rules of style, tropes, figures, etc. – Reading: Cicero's ethical works; Caesar, Livy, Curtius, Sallust, etc., or easier orations of Cicero: Pro Lege Manilla, Pro Archia, Pro Marcello, etc. Virgil; select odes of Horace, etc.

Greek. The whole of syntax. The teacher should see that the pupils acquire a fair understanding of the authors, and that they are able to write an easier Greek composition. The authors are orations of Isocrates, or of Chrysostom and Basil; also letters of Plato and Synesius, selections from Plutarch, poems of Phocylides, Theognis, etc.

Religion. Catechism of Canisius; the Greek Gospel.

History. Rudimenta historica, vol. V: Geography and heraldics.

Rhetoric. (Sophomore.)

Precepts of rhetoric from the oratorical works of Cicero and Aristotle. The practice of the rules is chiefly based on Cicero, particularly his orations; also the historians may be used to some extent. The rules of poetry may be drawn from Aristotle's Poetics. Of the poets only the best should be read: Virgil, Horace, etc.

Greek. Repetition of syntax; prosody; the dialects, a further introduction into Greek literature. The standard authors are Demosthenes, Plato, Thucydides, Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, etc.; also Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, and Chrysostom may be read.

Other Latin and Greek authors which may be given into the hands of the pupils of the class of Rhetoric and of other classes, are enumerated by Juvencius.

Religion. Catechism of Canisius (larger one). On Saturday the Acts of the Apostles are read in Greek, or an oration of Chrysostom.

History. Rudimenta historica, vol. VI: Compendium of Church history.

The school hours were not too long; two hours and a half in the morning and the same in the afternoon; in the highest class (rhetoric), only two hours in the morning and the same in the afternoon; thus the students of the highest grade were wisely given more time for home work. There was ordinarily a full holiday every week, usually Wednesday or Thursday, "lest," as the regulations of the Province of the Upper Rhine have it, "the pupils have to go to school four days in succession."^[29] These holidays were frequently spent in a country house (villa), near the city. On the whole, study and recreation were so distributed that the complaints of "overburdening" the students could not reasonably be made in Jesuit schools.

Against the literary curriculum of the Society some serious charges have been made by modern critics. It has been said that nothing but the ancient languages was studied in Jesuit colleges, and that other branches, as history, were entirely neglected, "Preoccupied before all else with purely formal studies, and exclusively devoted to the exercises which give a training in the use of elegant language, the Jesuits leave real and concrete studies in entire neglect. History is almost wholly banished from their programme. It is only with reference to the Greek and Latin texts that the teacher should make allusion to the matters of history, which are necessary for the understanding of the passage under examination. No account is made of modern history, nor of the history of France. 'History', says a Jesuit Father, 'is the destruction of him who studies it'."^[30] This last remark strikes us, and perhaps also other readers of M. Compayré's work, as ridiculous. We ask: Who is this Jesuit Father that made such a silly statement? Is he one of the framers of the Ratio Studiorum, or one of its commentators, or a Superior of the Order? No; no one knows who he is – if ever a Jesuit has said such nonsense. But granted one has said it, must not every fair-minded reader ask: Can the Jesuit Order be said to hold and defend all the views which every individual Jesuit has uttered? If a Professor of Harvard or Yale University made a foolish remark, would it be fair to hold up the two universities to ridicule?

But let us examine the facts. History is taught in Jesuit schools and was taught in the Old Society, it matters little whether this and other branches were called accessories or side branches – they were called so because much less time was devoted to them than to the study of language and literature. It is true, the historical studies were not then cultivated, neither in Protestant nor Catholic schools, to such extent as is done now. But history was never neglected in Jesuit colleges, and it gradually obtained a place of honor among the literary studies. This was evidently the case in France in the beginning of the eighteenth century. We refer the reader to various works which deal with this subject.^[31] In Germany we find in the Jesuit colleges, as early as 1622, special historical works assigned to various classes. In these compendia also "modern" history was treated.^[32] The text-books most in use in German Jesuit colleges during the eighteenth century, were the Rudimenta Historica of Father Dufrène,^[33] and the Introductio of Father Wagner.^[34] From Father Kropf's work it is evident that, when he wrote this work in 1736, history was treated quite systematically, in a well graded course, in all the classes below philosophy. This is evident from the programme given above on pages 121-125. The same author gives also a method of teaching history.^[35]

Nor was geography neglected. In the earlier Jesuit schools it was treated more fully only in the philosophical course, in connection with astronomy, or as "erudition" in the class of rhetoric. As early as 1677 a geographical text-book, written by Father König,^[36] was used in German colleges. We have proofs that geography was taught in the colleges in France, twelve years after the publication of the Ratio Studiorum. A few years ago a manuscript was found belonging to the old Jesuit college of Avignon, written in the year 1611 by Father Bonvalot. It contains, in ninety-four folio pages, a brief but complete course of geography. This course is divided into two parts: Europe, and the countries outside of Europe. Every country of Europe forms the subject of a special chapter, in which ancient and modern geography are combined. Special attention is paid to the customs of the peoples, the form of government, etc. This manuscript was used as the basis of lessons in geography, which were dictated to the pupils. It has been said that geography was not taught in Jesuit schools until long after this branch had been cultivated in the schools of the Oratory and the Petites-Écoles of Port-Royal. And yet Father Bonvalot wrote his course of geography the very year in which the Oratory was founded and more than thirty years before the opening of the Petites-Écoles. But Father Bonvalot was perhaps an exception. By no means. Documentary evidence is at hand to show that, before the middle of the seventeenth century, there was hardly a manuscript "course of rhetoric" in the colleges of Lyons, Tournon, Avignon, etc. , which did not contain a course of geography.^[37] The custom of dictating these lessons was continued until the handbooks of geography were published by the Jesuits Monet, Riccioli, Labbe, Briet, Saint-Juste, Buffier. Father Daniel, S. J., in an interesting essay of twenty-eight pages, has given many important details about the teaching of geography in Jesuit colleges of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.^[38]

Special attention was given to the geography of the country in which the colleges were situated, but great interest was also taken in the geographical discoveries in foreign countries. The Jesuits had, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, better advantages for obtaining geographical information than any other body of men. The Jesuit missionaries scattered all over the world sent regular accounts of their journeys and observations to their brethren in Europe. That much valuable geographical and ethnological information was contained in these reports may be seen from the "Jesuit Relations", seventy-three volumes of letters of Jesuits from New France, i. e. Canada and the Northern part of the United States.^[39] Several Jesuit missionaries have made most important contributions to the science of geography, not only by great discoveries as that of the Mississippi by Father Marquette, but also by most valuable maps. Thus we read of Father Martini in Baron von Richthofen's work on China: "Father Martini is the best geographer of all the missioners. By his great work, Novus Atlas Sinensis, the best and most complete description which we possess of China, he has become the Father of Chinese geography." The first maps of North Mexico, Arizona and Lower California, were prepared by four German Jesuits, among them the famous Father Kino (his German name was Kühn).^[40]

These few details taken from a mass of similar facts, show what interest the Jesuits took in geography, and even if we had no positive proof we would have to conjecture that they did not neglect its study in their schools. But the positive proofs abundantly show that another charge against the Jesuit colleges of former centuries is a sheer calumny.

Owing to the importance of Latin as the universal language of the educated world, less attention was devoted to the study of the mother-tongue. In this regard the schools of the Jesuits did not differ from those of the Protestants. However, at no time was the mother-tongue entirely neglected; and gradually it received more and more consideration. Thus, in France, rules for writing French verses appear in the dictated "courses of rhetoric" in 1663.^[41] About 1600, the Bohemian Jesuits asked and received permission to open a private "academy" for the study of the Czech language.^[42] As early as 1560 Father Jerome Nadal had exhorted the Jesuits at Cologne, "to cultivate diligently the German language and to find out a method of teaching it; they should also select pupils and teachers for this branch."^[43] In 1567 he gave the same order in Mentz. During the Thirty Years' War, the German Jesuits Balde, Mair, Bidermann and Pexenfelder, planned the establishment of a society for the improvement of the German language; but the calamities of that horrible war, which reduced Germany to a state of utter misery, frustrated this whole plan. From about 1730 on, the German language was taught in the Jesuit schools according to fixed rules, and the pupils were diligently practised in writing prose compositions and poetry. Many valuable testimonies on this subject are given by Father Duhr.^[44] The fact that many Jesuits are to be found among the prominent writers in the different modern languages is another proof that the vernacular was not neglected, much less "proscribed" as M. Compayré says.^[45] One of the finest German writers of the seventeenth century was the Jesuit Spe. The sweetness, power and literary merits of his collection of exquisite poems, entitled Trutz-Nachtigall (Dare-Nightingale), and of his prose work Güldnes Tugendbuch (Virtue's Golden Book) are admired by critics of the most different schools, Protestants as well as Catholics.^[46] Father Denis, a Jesuit of the eighteenth century, was a most distinguished German writer, and has been called "the pioneer of German literature in Austria." How could all these facts be explained if what Mr. Painter says were true: "The Jesuits were hostile to the mother-tongue; and distrusting the influence of its associations, endeavored to supplant it"?^[47]

After the pupil's mind had been enriched with the treasures of Latin and Greek literature, and after his native talents had been "cultivated" or "stimulated", as the Ratio very expressively designates it, the student entered on the study of philosophy.^[48] This course, if given completely, comprised three years. The Ratio of 1599 prescribed for the First Year: Introduction and Logics; Second Year: Physics, Cosmology and Astronomy; Third Year: Special Metaphysics, Psychology and Ethics. A course of mathematics runs parallel with philosophy.

In philosophy Aristotle was the standard author. Of course, those of his opinions which were contradictory to revealed truths were refuted.^[49] Special care is recommended in the correct explanation of the text of Aristotle. "No less pains are to be taken in the interpretation of the text than in the questions themselves. And the Professor should also convince the students that it is a very defective philosophy which neglects this study of the text."^[50] The Professor of Philosophy is also told "to speak respectfully of St. Thomas Aquinas and to follow him whenever possible."^[51] The Ratio had to encounter many an attack for not following St. Thomas more rigorously. But the composers of the Ratio wisely admitted modifications, as St. Thomas evidently could not claim infallibility in all questions.

The philosophical course comprised not only philosophy properly so called, but also mathematics and natural sciences. This successive teaching of literary and scientific subjects secured concentration and unity in instruction, whereas in modern systems too many branches, which have no connection with each other, are taught in the same class so that the mind of the young untrained learner is bewildered. There is another consideration which may vindicate the educational wisdom of the Ratio Studiorum in assigning mathematics and sciences to a later stage in the curriculum. Distinguished teachers of mathematics have recently pointed out that the mathematical teaching in the lower and middle classes is frequently beyond the capacity of the students of those grades. Problems are proposed which, at that stage, can at best be treated only mechanically and superficially.^[52] Mathematics, says a prominent writer on this subject, makes very high demands on the mental powers of the pupils, in such a degree that only the mature age derives the full benefit from the study of this branch.^[53]

In the philosophical course of the Jesuit colleges, mathematics was by no means slighted, or treated as a branch of small educational value. It will suffice to quote what an autograph treatise written by Father Clavius, the "Euclid of his Age," has on the teaching of mathematics. "First, let a teacher of more than ordinary learning and authority be chosen to teach this branch; otherwise, as experience proves, the pupils cannot be attracted to the study of mathematics. ... It is necessary that the professor have an inclination and a liking for teaching this science; he must not be distracted by other occupations, otherwise he will hardly be able to advance the students. In order that the Society may always have capable professors of this science, some men should be selected who are specially fitted for this task, and they should be trained in a private school (academia) in the science of mathematics. ... I need not mention that without mathematics the teaching of natural philosophy is defective and imperfect. – In the second place it is necessary that the pupils understand that this science is useful and necessary for a correct understanding of philosophy, and, at the same time, complements and embellishes all other studies. Nay more, they should know that this science is so closely related to natural philosophy that, unless they help each other, neither can maintain its proper place and dignity. In order to accomplish this it will be necessary for the students of physics to study mathematics at the same time; this is a custom which has always been kept up in the schools of the Society. For if the mathematical sciences were taught at any other time, the students of philosophy would think, and not without some reason, that they were not necessary for physics, and so very few would be inclined to study mathematics." The writer then goes on to show the necessity of mathematics for the study of the movements of heavenly bodies, of their distances, of the oppositions and conjunctions of the comets; of the tides, the winds, the rainbow, and other physical phenomena. He also treats of various exercises by which the study of mathematics can best be advanced, such as lectures given by the students on mathematical and astronomical subjects.^[54]

We find that in mathematics, pure and applied, the courses of the Jesuit colleges were advanced to the foremost rank; in arithmetic and geometry we notice that, as early as 1667, a single public course, under the direction of the Jesuits at Caen, numbered four hundred students.^[55] The Order had among its members many distinguished mathematicians, some of whom will be mentioned in succeeding chapters.

The modern course of physics was, in those centuries, a thing of the future. But the physical sciences were taught as far as they were known; in the middle of the eighteenth century, we find physical cabinets in regular use, and experimental lectures given to the classes by the professor of physics.^[56]

These testimonies will suffice to show that the Jesuits, however much they valued the classical studies, were not so one-sided as to disregard or neglect mathematics and natural sciences. What, then, should be said of Compayré's statements: "The Jesuits leave real and concrete studies in entire neglect. ... The sciences are involved in the same disdain as history. Scientific studies are entirely proscribed in the lower classes."^[57] Indeed, in the Old Society, the sciences were not taught in the five lower classes; there the Jesuits concentrated the efforts of the pupils on the languages; but in the three highest classes they applied the students with the same energy to the study of mathematics, sciences and philosophy.

Having thus far analyzed the Ratio Studiorum, we may be allowed to quote the judgment of Mr. Quick on the Ratio Studiorum: "The Jesuit system stands out in the history of education as a remarkable instance of a school system elaborately thought out and worked as a whole. In it the individual schoolmaster withered (sic!), but the system grew, and was, and I may say is, a mighty organism. The single Jesuit teacher might not be the superior of the average teacher in good Protestant schools, but by their unity of action the Jesuits triumphed over their rivals as easily as a regiment of soldiers scatters a mob."^[58] This system "points out a perfectly attainable goal, and carefully defines the road by which that goal is to be approached. For each class was prescribed not only the work to be done, but also the end to be kept in view. Thus method reigned throughout – perhaps not the best method, as the object to be attained was assuredly not the highest object (sic!), but the method such as it was, was applied with undeviating exactness. In this particular the Jesuit schools contrasted strongly with their rivals of old, as indeed with the ordinary school of the present day."^[59]

If we ask to which sources the Ratio Studiorum is to be referred, we must confess that an adequate answer is not easy. There are many little brooks which by their conflux form that mighty river. Ignatius and his companions had been trained in scholastic philosophy. The Constitutions and the Ratio Studiorum adapted this philosophic system, modified, however, and perfected by the teachers and writers of the Order. Hence the central position of Aristotle in philosophy, and St. Thomas Aquinas in theology.^[60]

The literary course was an adaptation of the humanistic schools as they existed shortly before the outbreak of the Reformation. It is especially Paris and the Netherlands which we have to consider as the chief sources of much that is contained in the Ratio. We heard that the great University of Paris was the Alma Mater of St. Ignatius and his first companions. Great must have been the influence of this seat of learning on the formation of the educational system of the Jesuits. Bartoli, one of the historians of the Society, goes so far as to say: "Spain gave the Society a father in St. Ignatius, France a mother in the University of Paris." From this University Ignatius probably adopted the division of his system of studies into the three parts: Languages, Arts or Philosophy, Theology. In languages again the Constitutions, as well as the Paris University, distinguished three parts: Grammar, Humanities, Rhetoric. The school exercises, especially the disputations in philosophy, were fashioned after those of Paris. Father Polanco, secretary of the Society, himself a student of Paris, writes about the colleges of Messina and Vienna, that "exercises (disputations) were added to the lectures after the model of those of Paris (more parisiensi)."^[61]

Ignatius himself had recommended Paris as "the University where one gains more profit in a few years than in some others in many."^[62] In 1553 he writes to Cardinal Morone that in the Collegium Germanicum in Rome, the exercises in the Artes Liberates were the same as in Paris, Louvain, and other celebrated Universities.^[63] Louvain was called by him a "most flourishing University," and he wishes to establish a college there.^[64] It was pointed out before, that the "plans of study" of Nadal and Ledesma exerted a great influence on the Ratio of 1599. Both these men had for many years studied at Paris, Ledesma also in Louvain.

This leads us to another source of the educational system of the Jesuits: the humanistic schools of the Netherlands. We spoke of Louvain. in chapter II. Ignatius had visited the Netherlands in 1529 and 1530, and a considerable number of Jesuits in the first decades of the Society came from that country. Ribadeneira enumerates 53 who became known as writers before 1600. Two of the men who were in the Commissions for drawing up the Ratio, Francis Coster and Peter Busaeus, were from the Netherlands. Others were influential as founders of colleges, for instance, Peter Canisius of Nymwegen; or as heads of famous institutions, like Leonard Kessel of Lyouvain, Rector of the College of Cologne.

As was said before, during his sojourn at Paris, Ignatius may have come into contact with the Brethren of the Common Life.^[65] These Brethren conducted famous schools all over the Netherlands; their college in Liège was perhaps the most flourishing school in Europe at the beginning of the Reformation. Many points conspicuous in the Ratio Studiorum, as well as in Sturm's system, were to be found in this college. Latin was the principal branch. It was taught very methodically, and the imitation of authors was insisted on. The course had eight classes; the lower were grammar classes; the fifth – and part of the sixth – was Rhetoric, the seventh and eighth taught Aristotelian philosophy and mathematics. Contests between the pupils (concertationes) were frequent, especially solemn ones at the distribution of prizes at the end of the scholastic year. On account of the great number of pupils, the classes were divided into decuriae, divisions of ten pupils each. At the head of each decuria was a decurio, to whom his ten subjects had to recite their lessons, etc.^[66] All these customs are found in the Ratio Studiorum.

A result of humanistic influences was also the domineering position which Cicero held in the classical course. To the humanists Cicero had been the author, whose style was considered by many with almost superstitious reverence.

Humanism in the Netherlands had been much more conservative than in Italy and Germany. Owing to the influence of the Brethren of the Common Life, it had kept more faithfully the Christian views of the earlier humanists. It certainly was this Christian humanism which appealed to the religious mind of Ignatius; he always suspected the writings of the younger humanists. Very early, shortly after his conversion, the Christian Knight of Erasmus had +fallen into his hands.^[67] He conceived for this book, as well as for the Colloquies and similar works of the author, an aversion in which time only confirmed him. Not that he was insensible to the author's grace of style (for it is said he made extracts from the Christian Knight in order to familiarize himself with the niceties of the Latin tongue), nor that he found heterodox propositions in it; but he felt repulsed by the color in which things and ideas were presented, by the malicious satire, lack of feeling, vanity, and hollow scepticism which were prominent on every page. Undoubtedly even if Luther had not started his Reformation, Ignatius would have become a leader in a reform opposed to the radical school of humanists, to whose disastrous influence the immorality of the time and the worldliness of many ecclesiastics is, to a great extent, to be ascribed.

The dependence of the Ratio on the University of Paris and the humanistic schools of the Netherlands refutes also the supposition that the Jesuits have drawn from Sturm's "Plan of Studies". Sturm himself had studied, from 1521-1523, in the school of the Brethren in Liège, from 1524-1529 at Louvain in the famous Collegium Trilingue; from 1530-1537 he was student and teacher in Paris. A German Protestant^[68] says: "The organization of the college of Liège made such an impression on young Sturm that he adopted it even in some minute details as the model for his school in Strasburg."^[69] Similarly speaks Professor Ziegler.^[70] Thus we see that Sturm had drawn his educational ideas from the very same schools in which many of the first Jesuits had been educated, and which were considered by them as models. Is it not much more probable that the Jesuits fashioned their own system after these schools, than after that of Sturm in Strasburg? Assertions, like that of Dr. Russell, that "the Society of Jesus incorporated so many of his [Sturm's] methods into the new Catholic schools,"^[71] are highly improbable, and certainly not substantiated by any positive proof. What was similar in both systems, was to be found in the humanistic schools of the Netherlands.^[72]

On equally feeble grounds rests another hypothesis advanced in recent years, namely that "what is really good in the Jesuit system can be traced almost in detail to Luiz Vives."^[73] In proof of this statement the fact is mentioned that Ignatius met Vives in Bruges. The Spaniard Vives was one of the most brilliant humanists of the time, and a distinguished writer on pedagogy. He, too, had studied at Paris (1509-1512), and spent a great part of his life in the Netherlands. The argument used against the dependence on Sturm, holds good in this case as well. It is asserted that Ignatius had borrowed from Vives, among other good things, "the physical care bestowed upon the young, the infrequency of punishment, the systematic teaching of Latin in a series of classes, the study of practical science, of history and geography, in conjunction with the explanation of the texts, the use of note books, emulation, and the like." Now many of these points were not inventions of Vives, but had been already mentioned by Quintilian.^[74]

The words of a German writer on pedagogy are well worth being quoted on this point: "Strange attempts have recently been made to show that the Jesuit pedagogy which, through its unquestionably grand results, has become famous, is to be traced back to Vives. The fact that Vives met the founder of the Society once, for a very short time, must serve as a proof. But if one examines the educational principles which the Jesuits are supposed to have taken from Vives: infrequency of punishment, physical care of the pupils, etc., it becomes immediately evident that these are principles which all reasonable educators have followed at all times. We should be forced to make the absurd assumption that, until the time of Vives, Catholics never in the past had had sound pedagogical views, if we wished to trace back these self-evident principles to Vives."^[75]

It really looks as though some writers are determined at least to deny all originality to the Ratio Studiorum, if they are compelled to admit that it achieved great results. We frankly and willingly admit that the authors of the Ratio borrowed much from existing systems, it matters little whence and how much. We must, however, claim that their experience from 1540-1599, and their painstaking efforts in drawing up the Ratio, had a considerable share in the results that attended their system.^[76] Above all, what is most characteristic in the Jesuit system, the wonderful unity and organization, was not borrowed from any other system, but is the work of the framers of the Constitutions and of the Ratio Studiorum.

 

1. Colleges of Germany are enumerated by Paulsen, l.c., pp. 265-281 (2nd ed., vol. I, pp. 390-406); those of Germany (Austria), Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, by Pachtler, vol. III, pp. IX—XVI.
2. Monumenta Historica Societatis Jesu: Monumenta Paedagogica, 1901-1902. We quote this important collection as Monumenta Paedagogica, to be carefully distinguished from Father Pachtler's Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica.
3. Monumenta Paedagogica, p. 8 and p. 89.
4. Monumenta Historica Societatis Jesu: "Litterae Quadrimestres", vol. I, pp. 349-358.
5. Monumenta Paedagogica, pp. 10-12; and p. 141 foll.
6. Ibid. – Father Pachtler had published one such plan, which he ascribed to Blessed Peter Canisius, probably written in 1560.
7. Documents given by Pachtler, vol. II, p. 1 foll. A summary in the Études, Paris, January 1889.
8. Extracts of this Memorandum in Janssen's Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, vol. VII, pp. 100-103.
9. Quick, Educational Reformers, p. 57.
10. In the Catholic World, April 1896: Early Labors of the Printing Press.
11. Huber, Jesuiten-Orden, p. 352.
12. Mon. Germ. Paed., vol. II, pp. 19-21.
13. Studienordnung, pp. 15-23.
14. See Sacchini, Historiae Societatis Jesu, Pars V, tom. prior, p. 337.
15. Woodstock Letters, 1896, pp. 506-507.
16. Pachtler, vol. II, pp. 25-217.
17. Was added in 1832. In the Ratio of 1599 natural sciences were treated as part of philosophy.
18. See John Gilmary Shea, History of Georgetown College, 1891, pp. 83-84.
19. Monumenta Paedagogica, p. 102.
20. "Before selecting the authors", says Father Nadal, "let the Prefect of Studies hear first the opinion of the teachers." Mon. Paed., p. 130.
21. The following translation of these rules is mostly that of Father Hughes, Loyola, p. 271 foll. These rules contain a few modifications of the Revised Ratio of 1832. The two Ratios may be seen separately in Pachtler, vol. II, 225 f. and Duhr, l. c., pp. 177-280.
22. On prelection see chapter XVI, § 1.
23. In Herder's Bibliothek der katholischen Pädagogik, vol. X, pp 340-348.
24. James Pontanus S. J., Progymnasmatum Latinitas sive dialogorum selectorum libri quattuor. Several works of this Jesuit were used in most European schools for over a century.
25. James Gretser, S. J., wrote several textbooks: a larger Greek Grammar, and a Compendium: Rudimenta Linguae Graecae, both in many editions; a Latin-Greek-German and a Latin-Greek Dictionary.
26. James Bayer, S. J., wrote a Short Greek Grammar, a Latin-Greek Dictionary, and a Latin-German and German-Latin Dictionary. Of the last the eleventh edition was published by Professor Mayer, Würzburg, 1865.
27. On this catechism see chapter XVIII.
28. This history, comprising six volumes, was written by Max Dufrène, S. J., (Landshut, Bavaria). It appeared first 1727-1730; several editions followed.
29. Pachtler, l. c., vol. III, p. 398.
30. Compayré, History of Pedagogy, pp. 144-145.
31. Daniel, Les Jésuites instituteurs de la jeunesse aux XVII. et XVIII. siècles. – Rochemonteix, Un collège de Jésuites aux XVII. et XVIII. siècles. Le collège Henri IV. de la Flèche, vol. IV., pp. 123-147.
32. Duhr, Studienordnung, pp. 104-106. – Pachtler, Monumenta, vol. IV, p. 105 seq. – The first compendium used was that of Tursellini, reaching down to 1598. It went through many editions in Germany, and in 1682 Father Ott supplemented it by a history of the seventeenth century.
33. Pachtler, vol. IV, p. 112 seq.
34. Pachtler, l. c., p. 118 seq.
35. Pachtler, l. c., p. 116; and German translation of Kropf's work in Herder's Bibliothek der katholischen Pädagogik, vol. X, p. 422.
36. Pachtler, l. c., pp. 106-107.
37. Chossat, Les jésuites à Avignon, pp. 316-318.
38. La geographie dans les collèges des Jésuites aux XVII. et XVIII. siècles. In the Études, June 1879.
39. Edited by Reuben Gold Thwaites, published by Burrows Brothers, Cleveland, Ohio, 1896-1901. The letters of the missionaries were read by the students in the colleges. Father Nadal said they might be read to the boarders during dinner and supper. (Mon. Paed. p. 612.).
40. See Notes upon the First Discoveries of California, Washington, 1879.
41. Chossat, Les Jésuites, à Avignon, p. 320.
42. Duhr, Studienordnung, p. 110.
43. Ib., p. 109: "Exerceant diligenter linguam germanicam y et inveniant rationem qua id commodissime fieri possit; deligantur etiam qui eam sunt docendi et quis docturus."
44. Ib., pp. 110-116.
45. History of Pedagogy, p. 144.
46. Duhr, Frederick Spe, Herder, Freiburg and St. Louis, 1901. See the writer's article "Attitude of the Jesuits in the Trials for Witchcraft," American Catholic Quarterly Review, July 1902, p. 500. – This Father Spe is better known as the heroic opponent of witch persecution.
47. History of Education, p. 170.
48. See Hughes, Loyola, pp. 274-281.
49. Reg. Prof. Philosophiae, 2.
50. Ib., 12.
51. Ib., 6.
52. Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum etc., 1901, vol. VIII, p. 201.
53. Professor Simon, in Baumeister's Handbuch der Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre, vol. IV, "Mathematik", p 33.
54. Monumenta Paedagogica, pp. 471-478.
55. Crétineau-Joly, Histoire de la Compagnie, vol. IV, ch. 3. – Hughes, l. c., p. 275. – See also Janssen, vol. VII, pp. 86-87; vol. IV (16. ed.), p. 414.
56. Pachtler, vol. III, p. 441, n. 7.
57. History of Pedagogy, p. 144.
58. Educational Reformers, p. 508.
59. Ib., p. 49.
60. This close adherence to Aristotle has been made a subject of reproach against the Jesuit system. And yet Protestant universities followed Aristotle as closely as the Ratio. Professor Schwalbe said in the Conference on questions of Higher Education, held at Berlin in 1900: "We have grown up in the belief in the infallibility of the dogma of Aristotle. When I was a student, Aristotle was still considered the greatest scientist on earth. I have investigated this question most thoroughly, and have found that the universities, even the freest, with the one exception of Wittenberg, fined any one who dared to contradict any of Aristotle's propositions on scientific subjects. In Oxford the penalty was so high that Giordano Bruno was unable to pay it." Verhandlungen über die Fragen des höheren Unterrichts (Halle, 1902), p. 109. – This is a good illustration of the fact that there existed a Protestant "Inquisition" as well as a Catholic, and it should warn certain writers to speak with less religious bitterness on the regrettable Galileo affair. – Professor Paulsen states in his latest work: Die deutschen Universitäten (1902, p. 43), that the dread of heresy, during the seventeenth century, was probably greater in the Lutheran universities than in the Catholic, because in the former the doctrine was less certain, and dangers were apprehended not only from Catholicism but also from Calvinism. Hence also in the philosophical faculties of Protestant universities theological orthodoxy was insisted on most rigorously. The same author says that in the frequent changes from Lutheranism to Calvinism, and vice versa, which took place in various Protestant states in Germany, careful inquiries were made as to whether all teachers and officials had accepted the change with due submission. Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts, vol. I, p. 324.
61. Duhr, Studienordnung, p. 5.
62. Joly, Life of St. Ignatius, p. 85. – Cartas de San Ignacio (Madrid 1874), vol. I, p. 76.
63. Cartas, vol. III, p. 178.
64. Ib., vol. II, p. 292.
65. See page 32.
66. See Ziegler, Geschichte der Pädagogik, p. 52.
67. Joly, Saint Ignatius of Loyola, p. 70.
68. Ch. Schmidt, Director of the Protestant Gymnasium at Strasburg.
69. Jean Sturm, pp. 5 and 36.
70. Geschichte der Pädagogik, p. 75.
71. German Higher Schools, p. 47.
72. After this chapter had been finished, I found that Professor Paulsen had expressed the same conclusion in his Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts (vol. I, p. 412), where he states that any dependence of the Jesuit system on Sturm's plan is most improbable.
73. Lange, in Encyclopädie des gesammten Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesens, IX, 776. See Duhr, l. c., p. 13.
74. See Duhr, Studienordnung, p. 15.
75. Dr. Frederick Kayser, in Historisches Jahrbuch, Munich 1894, vol. XV, page 350, article: "Johannes Ludwig Vives."
76. "It may be said in general that the practical experience (of the early Jesuits) exerted a greater influence on the formation of the Order's pedagogy than the study of pedagogical theorizers." G. Müller, quoted by Paulsen, l. c., vol. I, page 412.