education to all kinds and conditions of men, but the programme he laid down in the early part of the 17th century lies before us to-day as an ideal system, embracing the highest principles of the democracy of the world, as it is understood in this century.
It is significant that while we are preaching his principles we are most of us unfamiliar with his name. A copy of his chief work was requested at a library in New York recently and the librarian said: “Comenius? oh yes, we have his life. Is he coming over to lecture?” The fact that he has been dead since 1672 does not mean, however, that we are not availing ourselves of his teachings, as far as in us lies.
One of his chief principles was the advantage of learning foreign languages, and he insisted that the best way to learn a language was to speak as much of it as one gained by speaking it from day to day, leaving the grammar and rhetoric to follow.
So modern was he, as we interpret the term, that although a devout preacher of the Moravian Church, he was as much a pragmatist as our own William James in his methods. He believed that example had force far stronger than precept and that results were the only proof of effectual effort, physical, mental or moral. He insisted that discipline was intended to prevent a recurrence of the fault corrected by reproof, and that in order to make discipline effective the actual reason for punishment must be made clear to the offender.
He was as much opposed to corporal punishment as the most ardent follower of the Montessori methods to-day, and quite as anxious to make the school a happy pleasure ground for the child, as are the disciples of Froebel in our own Kindergartens. Indeed the first seeds of the modern Kindergarten methods were sown by Comenius and a glance at his noted “School of Infancy” shows very definitely his attitude towards little children and his belief that on their early education rests the foundation of the future state. With him the child was literally the father of the man and the child’s development stood for all that was strongest in the government of the nation.
Comenius plead for the gradual development of the child from infancy to early childhood under the care of his father and mother. He cites, as an instance of the need for a mutual understanding between child and parent, the fact that Themistocles, the wise ruler of Athens, was seen riding astride a long reed, accompanied by his tiny son who had a similar reed which represented their horses; when questioned by a passer-by as to this singular pastime, Themistocles replied: “When you are a father you will understand.” One of our own senators to-day quotes, as an example of the wisdom he learnt from his grandmother, “those days when Grandma was willing to go fishing with me and wait more than an hour for me to catch a small catfish, taught me more than all I learned in lesson time.” So human nature changes very little in fundamental things, for it is a long stretch of time from Themistocles’ day to our own, and Comenius in between held the same faith in the advantage to the child of parental sympathy.
His outline of the great universal education was as follows:
The establishment of one system for all men and women. Can our most advanced suffragists demand more? Do our highest ideals of Democracy go further?
He divided the course of universal education into four periods.
From infancy to six years, the home school and the kindergarten; from child hood to twelve years, the elementary school (our grammar school); adolescence, from twelve to eighteen years. The study of Latin was to begin, (our high school); from eighteen to twenty-four years, university training and travel (our college). He held that a school of infancy should be available everywhere, an elementary school in each village, a Grammar school in each city or town, a University in each province or kingdom.
The three first periods were to be covered by all boys and girls. The university was to be reserved for those of higher ability. But the higher education, like the first periods, was open to all who had the intelligence to learn. Education was a broad ladder for everyone to climb as high as his or her ability would permit.
Comenius was a living illustration of the doctrine of Christ as regards the universal brotherhood of man. He believed that all men had a common divine father and so were entitled to all the best that the world afforded of knowledge which was the road to strength and and true happiness.
His school of infancy was to teach songs, simple counting, the difference between
