Secondary School Reform in Imperial Germany [Course Book ed.] 9781400853083

Citation preview

Secondary School Reform in Imperial Germany

SECONDARY SCHOOL REFORM IN IMPERIAL GERMANY James C. Albisetti

Princeton University Press Princeton, New Jersey

Copyright ©1983 by Pnnceton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, NewJersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, Guildford, Surrey All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data will be found on the last printed page of this book Publication of this book has been aided by a grant from the Paul Mellon Fund of Princeton University Press This book has been composed in Linotron Sabon Clothbound editions of Princeton University Press books are printed on acid-free paper, and binding materials are chosen for strength and durability. Paperbacks, while satisfactory for personal collections, are no usually suitable for library rebinding. Printed in the Umted States of America by Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

To My Father

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

IX

ABBREVIATIONS

xi

Part One: The

Background

INTRODUCTION

3

ONE: Bildung and the Gebildeten TWO: The Gymnasium in Imperial Germany Part Two: Issues and Inaction,

16 36 1868-1888

THREE: The "Demands of the Present" FOUR: The Overburdening of German Youth FIVE: Raising Young Germans Part Three: The Kaiser and the School

59 119 140 Conferences

six: The Kaiser Intervenes SEVEN: The School Conference of 1890 EIGHT: Reprise: The School Conference of 1900 NINE: Comparisons and Conclusions

171 208 243 292

BIBLIOGRAPHY

315

INDEX

357

(vii)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My interest in secondary school reform in Imperial Germany was first stimulated by a brief report on this topic by Peter Vinten-Johansen to Professor Hans Gatzke's graduate seminar on the Second Reich at Yale University. I returned to the subject in Professor Peter Gay's research seminar; under his always stimulating criticism and encouragement, I completed a first version of this study as my Ph.D. dissertation. Professors Gatzke, Henry Turner, and Franklin Baumer offered valuable criticism of the manuscript at that time. During the often delayed process of revising and expanding the manuscript, I received invaluable assistance from Professor Fritz Ringer of Boston University during a National Endowment for the Hu­ manities Summer Seminar in 1979, and from Professor Konrad Jarausch of the University of Missouri—Columbia, whose careful reading of the manuscript and helpful bibliographical suggestions enabled me to clarify a number of issues. Re­ maining errors are of my own omission or commission. For their aid in my research, I would like to thank Herr Waldmann and Frau Olechnizak of the Zentrales Staatsarchiv, Historische Abteilung II, Merseburg, East Germany; Dr. Ernst Kreuzer of the Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz in West Berlin; Frau Sabine Preuss of the Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Dahlem; Professor Kurt Koszyk of the Institut fur Zeitungsforschung in Dortmund; Frau Pastorin Imort of the Bodelschwingh-Archiv in Bethel bei Bielefeld; Norman Wadham of the Teachers College Library of Columbia University; Ms. Andrea Foster of the Interlibrary Loan Office of Sterling Me­ morial Library at Yale; and Ms. Barbara Hale of the Interlibrary Loan Office of King Library at the University of Ken­ tucky. Professor Gerald Feldman of the University of California at Berkeley, Herr Peter Gob of the Werksarchiv der Farbenfabrik Bayer AG, Professor Wilhelm Grunwald of the Niedersachsisehe Staats- und Universitatsbibliothek in Got-

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

tingen, and Hans Werner von Gossler-Kubitz of Pea. de Cor­ doba, Argentina, helped me with searches for material that proved fruitless. Charles McClelland, Thomas Helde, and John Piper offered valuable advice on dealing with the East German authorities. This study could not have been completed without the fi­ nancial assistance of the Graduate School of Yale University, the Concilium on International and Area Studies, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and my family. To my father, who offered me frequent encouragement during years of in­ vestigating overcrowded professions and overburdened stu­ dents, I dedicate this work.

ABBREVIATIONS

The following abbreviations appear in the footnotes: BfhS

Blatter fiir hdheres Schulwesen

Centralblatt, 18—

Centralblatt fiir die gesamte Unterrichtsverwaltung in Preussen, Jahrgang 18—

COIR

Central-Organ fiir die Interesse des Realschulwesens

DhG

Das humanistische

DndS

Die neue deutsche Schule

Gymnasium

DR

Deutsche

NAZ

Norddeutsche Allgemeine

NJ

Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Padagogik

NPZ

Neue Preussischer Zeitung

PA

Padagogisches

PJ

Preussische Jahrbiicher

RA SB

Rundschau Zeitung (Kreuzzeitung)

Archiv

Deutscher Reichs- und Koniglich

Preussischer

Staats-Anzeiger (Reichs-Anzeiger) Stenographische Berichte iiber die Verhandlungen des Preussischen Hauses der Abgeordneten

ZfGW

Zeitschrift fur das Gymnasialwesen

ZfR

Zeitschrift fiir die Reform der hdheren Schulen

ZStA-II, K M

Zentrales Staatsarchiv, Historische Abteilung II, Merseburg, Kultusministerium

Zt.

Zeitschrift

(xi)

Part One THE BACKGROUND

INTRODUCTION

I have grasped the new spirit of the expiring century. Kaiser Wilhelm II'

O

N THE MORNING of 4 December 1890, in the audi­ torium of the Prussian Ministry of Religion, Educa­ tion, and Medicine at Unter den Linden 4, the thirtyone-year-old Kaiser Wilhelm II addressed a conference of educators who averaged nearly twice his age. The purpose of his speech, one of the longest this loquacious monarch ever delivered, was to inform the assembled delegates of his will regarding the reform of secondary education. The tirade he aimed at the existing system, in which most of those present had risen to prominence, sounded three major themes. In the first place, Wilhelm argued that the secondary schools had failed to adapt to the changing needs of industrializing Ger­ many and thus were not providing the coming generation with adequate training for what he called "the current demands of our world position." His second criticism centered on what he considered to be "the excess of mental work" in the sec­ ondary schools, which he said damaged the health of the nation's future leaders and thereby the nation itself: "I am looking for soldiers!" the Kaiser exclaimed; "We want a ro­ bust generation who can also serve as the intellectual leaders and officials of the nation." Finally, Wilhelm denounced the lack of a national spirit in the classical Gymnasium, the dom­ inant secondary school; in his view, "We must make German the basis of the Gymnasium; we should raise young Germans, not young Greeks and Romans."1 In an age obsessed with "questions"—one need only think of the social question, the Jewish question, the colonial ques­ tion, the woman question—the Kaiser's speech marked the • Verhandlungen iiber Fragen des hoheren Unterrichts, Berlin 4. bis 17. Dezember 1890 (Berlin, 1891), p. 770. This will be cited as 1S90. 1 Ibid., pp. 70, 75, 72.

INTRODUCTION

high point of public concern about the "school question." In simple terms, the school question asked, "How should the elite classical schools of the mid-nineteenth century be re­ formed to meet the needs of the rapidly approaching twentieth century?" Yet in Imperial Germany this relatively simple ques­ tion actually encompassed a whole series of interrelated issues. Did the rapid advancement of industrialization in the late nineteenth century or the stunning progress in scientific knowledge necessitate a change in the secondary school cur­ riculum? Should a comprehensive secondary school be main­ tained as a counterforce to the fragmentation being produced by increasing academic and technical specialization, or should a system of tracking be used? If the latter choice was made, when and how should the proper educational track for a child be determined? What could or should be done to prevent the growing demand for secondary and higher education on the part of social groups traditionally excluded from them, in­ cluding women, from leading to an oversupply of university graduates? Did Germany's transition from a primarily rural society to an urban one place any new demands on the edu­ cational system, especially in the areas of health and fitness? How should the schools respond to the changing conceptions of youth in the late nineteenth century? In a country that had recently introduced universal suffrage, should the schools pro­ vide civic training? In a country recently unified, should the schools actively promote national and patriotic sentiments? In the face of anarchist violence and a rapidly growing socialist movement, what could or should the schools do to foster loyalty to the existing social and political systems, especially in an age when traditional religious justifications of the status quo were clearly declining in effectiveness? The Kaiser's insistence that the Prussian Gymnasium had neglected the modern, the healthy, and the national was thus a succinct summary of the many issues involved in the school question. In a second speech to the same conference, Wilhelm claimed that in highlighting these themes he had "grasped the spirit of the expiring century." This claim was not unfounded,

INTRODUCTION

for the debate over secondary school reform reflected very directly several major cultural concerns of the fin-de-siecle, that period described by the novelist Heinrich Hart as "this age of searchings and tired doubtings, of gropings and false starts, of confidence in the future combined with fear of back­ sliding."' The problems of defining and adapting to the "mod­ ern," the fears of degeneration implicit in the calls for vigor, and the increasingly strident assertion of national values—all were characteristic of western European culture during that transition from the Victorian to the modern world that most historians date about 1890. Germany, despite its new political beginnings in 1866 and 1871, shared fully in this powerful sense of cultural transition which took place around 1890; even in politics, Wilhelm's accession in 1888 to the throne that had been occupied three months before by his ninetyone-year-old grandfather and the dismissal less than two years later of Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who had dominated German political life for a generation, heightened the aware­ ness of the end of an era.4 In an atmosphere so conscious of transition, debate over the reform of secondary education often became a discussion over the future of German culture and society as a whole. The discussions were not restricted to educators: other participants included members of legislatures and local governments; professional organizations of lawyers, physicians, architects, engineers, and industrialists; and individuals ranging from Friedrich Nietzsche to Friedrich Krupp. Included also were two Kaisers, Bismarck, and most of Imperial Germany's prom­ inent professors. In varying detail, and from a myriad of points of view, these individuals and groups addressed the question > Heinrich Hart, Gesammelte Werke (3 vols.; Berlin, 1907), 3:88. < For an interesting appreciation of this sense of transition in German culture around 1890, see Adalbert Wahl, Deutsche Geschichte (4 vols.; Stutt­ gart, 1926-1936), 3:1-20. Two examples of the younger generation's en­ thusiasm for the new Kaiser are Hermann Conradi, Wilhelm II und die junge Generation (Leipzig, 1890), and Heinrich Pudor, Kaiser Wilhelm II und Rembrandt als Erzieher (Dresden, 1891).

INTRODUCTION

of how, if at all, schools that had been virtually unchanged since the 1830s should adapt to the challenges raised by in­ dustrialization, urbanization, and national unification. In Prussia, the largest German state and the undisputed leader in educational matters, the government sponsored commis­ sions of inquiry in 1873, 1890, and 1900 in a continuing effort to reach a consensus on the issues; new curricula and other regulations for the schools were issued in 1882, 1892, and 1901.5 Only after the third attempt at solving the school question did debate on the major issues subside; even then, several unresolved problems continued to produce acrimo­ nious exchanges in the years leading up to World War I. The following study investigates both the perceptions and the politics of secondary school reform in Imperial Germany; to the extent that these aspects are separable, the discussion of issues is handled in Part Two and the political process of reform in Part Three. In addition to contributing to our knowl­ edge of German educational history in an age when German schools were often models for other countries, this study aims to provide new insight into the sense of national direction in Germany in the late nineteenth century. Much recent historical writing about Imperial Germany has overemphasized the re­ sistance to change: Robert Anchor's assertion that Germany's "transition from a premodern to a modern society . . . was not successful, as the Germans consistently failed to effect a rapprochement between continuity and change, between in­ ertia and momentum, between native traditions and borrow­ ings from abroad, and between their own national existence and that of others" is only a slightly exaggerated statement of a widely held view.6 At the least, the extent of the debate s In Imperial Germany, education was controlled by the states, so that Wilhelm was acting in his role as King of Prussia in this conference. The debate over secondary school reform was not restricted to Prussia, however; in the text I will always make clear whether I am referring to Prussia or to Germany as a whole. 4 Robert Anchor, Germany Confronts Modernization (Lexington, Mass., 1972.), unpaginated preface. For an insightful critique of much of the recent

INTRODUCTION

over secondary school reform should demonstrate that the conservative traditionalists were opposed by a large, varied, and vocal segment of the German elite that perceived the need to adapt ideas and institutions to changed economic and social conditions, and that some Germans, including Wilhelm II, advocated plunging boldly ahead into the twentieth century as they expected it to be. This is not meant to suggest that the school question pro­ duced a simple division of the concerned population into con­ servatives and reformers, or antimodernists and modernists. The three themes stressed by the Kaiser in 1890 pointed to­ ward change in several, possibly contradictory, directions; as will be shown, reformers of differing persuasions could oppose each other as vigorously as they did the defenders of the status quo. Issues such as the proper relationship between liberal and vocational education, the relative advantages of a com­ prehensive school versus several more specialized tracks, and the optimum balance between the individual's freedom to pur­ sue any studies he may choose and the society's need for graduates in various fields do not lend themselves to investi­ gation in simple terms of conservatism and reform. Further­ more, the demands that the classical Gymnasium give greater attention to physical fitness and to German studies, which were certainly new views in the late nineteenth century, none­ theless contained the seeds of an antiintellectualism and hypernationalism that do not have the positive connotations usually associated with the term modern. In fact, among the most vehement critics of the traditional Gymnasium were a number of volkisch thinkers usually considered as the epitome of German antimodernism in this period.7 The complexity and interdependence of the issues involved in the debate of the school question necessitate treating it in historiography on Imperial Germany, see Geoff Eley, "The Wilhelmine Right: How It Changed," in Richard J. Evans, ed., Society and Politics inWilhelmine Germany (New York, 1978), pp. 112-117. 71 refer to Paul de Lagarde and Julius Langbehn; see Fritz Stern, The Politics of Cultural Despair (Garden City, N.Y., 1965).

INTRODUCTION all its aspects. Accounts of the debate written at the time concentrated almost exclusively on the curricular issues, neglecting the social and political dimensions of the reforms. 8 Recently, several historians have examined isolated fragments of the debate, such as the push for parity by the modern schools, the efforts to preserve the social exclusiveness of the Gymnasium, or the campaigns to promote patriotism and fight socialism through the schools; in most cases, their works suffer from a very narrow perspective and also from an excessive present-mindedness. 9 The two most important recent studies have reached diametrically opposed conclusions about the reforms finally adopted in 1900: Detlef Miiller sees no valid 8 Among the major examples are Friedrich Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Untemchts auf den deutschen Schulen und Umversitaten (2d ed.; 2 vols.; Leipzig, 1897); August Messer, Die Reformbewegung auf dem Gebtete des Gymnasialwesens von 1882 bis 1901 (Leipzig and Berlin, 1901); Wilhelm Lexis, ed., Die Reform des hoheren Schulwesens in Preussen (Halle, 1902); and Gerhard Budde, Der Kampf um die Vorherrschaft der Antike im Unterricht der hoheren Knabenschulen (Langensalza, 1910). 9 Entwicklung des reahstischen hoheren Schulwesens in Preussen (Cologne, 1956), which is excellent on chronology and short on analysis; and Heinz Balschun, "Zum schulpolitischen Kampf um die Monopolstellung des humamstischen Gymnasiums in Preussen" (Inaugural diss., Martin-LutherUniversitat Halle-Wittenberg, 1964), which takes a simplistic Marxist-Leninist line. For the concern about the social exclusiveness of secondary and higher education, see Hartmut Titze, Die Pohtisierung der Erztehung (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1973), and especially the massive work by Detlef K. Muller, Sozialstruktur und Schulsystem (Gottingen, 1977), which he has recently summarized in English: "The Qualifications Crisis and School Reform in Late Nineteenth-Century Germany," History of Education 9 (1980):$! 5-331. On the intrusion of nationalist and antisociahst views into the schools, see esp. Heinz Ernst Brunkhorst, Die Etnbeziehung der preussischen Schule tn die Pohtik des Staates (Dusseldorf, 1956); and Helmut Konig, "Der Kaiser Erlass vom 1. Mai 1889,"7ahrbuch fur Erztehungs- und Schulgeschichte 12 (i972):58100. Combining an interest in nationalism and the defensive strategies of the social elite are the fairly thin essay by Heinz-Joachim Heydorn and Gemot Koneffke, Zur Bildungsgeschichte des deutschen Impertaltsmus (Glashutten im Taunus, 1973); and the more detailed dissertation of Heydorn's student Eckhard Glockner, Zur Schulreform im preussischen Impertaltsmus (Glashutten im Taunus, 1976).

(8)

INTRODUCTION

educational function in the creation of three equally privileged tracks, but only an effort to preserve the social exclusivity of the Gymnasium, while Eckhard Glockner views the tracks as an attempt to broaden the social recruitment of the elite but criticizes them for sacrificing liberal education to preprofessional training.10 As Lenore O'Boyle has argued, much recent work on sec­ ondary education in nineteenth-century Germany has treated the schools as so completely the product of competing social forces that it has neglected the beliefs and interests of the individuals most directly involved in education, that is, the teachers and professors." Nevertheless, educators resisted en­ croachment on their field of expertise by laymen as much as, if not more than, did other professional groups in the nine­ teenth century. The following pages attempt to avoid the er­ rors of both the earlier studies that considered education as virtually autonomous of social conditions and the recent works that deny any such autonomy. This willingness to consider the partial political autonomy of the schools must also be supplemented by an appreciation of their cultural autonomy. European secondary education in the nineteenth century did more than provide credentials for and instill loyalty in future civil servants and professionals; its ideology, in fact, stressed its impractical nature. Through a concentration on the languages and literatures of ancient Greece and Rome, the classical secondary schools exposed •° Muller's views in Sozialstruktur und Schulsystem, passim; "The Quali­ fications Crisis," p. 329; and Miiller, Bernd Zymek, Erika Kiipper, and Longin Pierre, "Modellentwicklung zur Analyse von Krisenphasen im Verhaltnis von Schulsystem und staatlichen Beschaftigungssystem," in Ulrich Herrmann, ed., Historische Padagogik (Weinheim, 1977), esp. p. 44. Glockner, Schulreform im preussischen Imperialisms, pp. 145, 151, 74, 104, 237. For a valuable critique of both Muller's and Glockner's approaches, see Christoph Fiihr, "Die preussischen Schulkonferenzen von 1890 und 1900," in Peter Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik tn Preussen zur Zeitdes Kaiserreiehes (Stuttgart, 1980), esp. pp. 113-223. " Lenore O'Boyle, "A Possible Model for the Study of Nineteenth-Century Education in Europe," Journal of Social History 12 (1978):236-239.

INTRODUCTION

pupils to ideas and patterns of thought that, if not always what Matthew Arnold called "the best that has been thought and known," nevertheless imparted enough of what he labeled "sweetness and light" to enable them "to turn a stream of fresh and free thought upon our stock notions and habits."11 In teaching young men to think, the secondary schools per­ formed a function that cannot be discussed adequately in terms of social and economic interests, even if defense of the tra­ ditional classical curriculum often degenerated in the late nine­ teenth century into a defense of professional status. To the extent that there is a hero in the following pages, it is Friedrich Paulsen. He saw more clearly and argued more cogently than any other German of his time that obligatory Greek and Latin, perceptibly failing to fulfill the tasks assigned to them in the Gymnasium, could and should be abandoned without endan­ gering the pursuit of truth and critical reason in secondary and higher education.1' Calling attention to the autonomy of the schools in certain areas does not mean neglecting the importance of social and political interests in the debate of the school question. A major portion of this study, based largely on the archives of the Prussian Ministry of Education,is devoted to the petitions of pressure groups and to the responses of that ministry, which at various times resisted, followed, and even led public opinion about secondary school reform, always trying to balance budgetary and educational demands with perceived social needs. Individual officials in the Ministry of Education were of crit11 Matthew Arnold, Culture and Anarchy, edited and with an introduction by J. Dover Wilson (Cambridge, 1971), p. 8. Bismarck certainly knew that education at an elite institution did not necessarily produce defenders of the social and political status quo—he always said that he had left the Gymnasium as an atheist and a republican: Otto von Bismarck, Dte gesammelte Werke, ed. Hermann von Petersdorff et al. (15 vols.; Berlin, 1923-1933), 15:5. •> This was the major argument in the closing chapters of both the first and second editions of his Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts, which ap­ peared in 1885 and 1897. '«1 w a s allowed t o use the files o f the Ministry o f Education, the Ministry of State, and the Kaiser's Civil Cabinet, but not the papers of the various ministers of education and their subordinates.

(IO)

INTRODUCTION

ical importance to the course of reform in this period; so were the interventions of Wilhelm II, who used to be credited with exercising a "personal rule" after 1890 but who in recent years has frequently been relegated to a minor role in the shaping of German foreign and domestic policies. The recent polemical literature about secondary school re­ form in Imperial Germany has almost totally neglected the perspective on German developments that comparative study of educational reforms in other countries in the same period can provide.'5 In the late nineteenth century, interest in de­ velopments in other countries was high: an American educator called the conference addressed by the Kaiser in 1890 "in many respects . . . the most important educational body of our time," adding that "Prussia's example in matters of this kind is of capital importance."16 In the course of the next decade, the Committee of Ten in the United States, the Bryce Commission in England, the Ribot Commission in France, and a Russian school conference debated many of the same issues as were discussed in Prussia.1? The final chapter of this work will, to the extent the available literature permits, corn­ 's Glockner's bibliography contains no works on foreign countries, Muller's has general studies on the sociology of education but no works specifically on other educational systems. On the need for comparative study, see Fiihr, "Die preussischen Schulkonferenzen," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik in Preussen, p. 223. 16 Educational Review 1 (1891):174. The anonymous author was probably Nicholas Murray Butler. 17 See the Bibliography for the primary and secondary sources on other countries consulted for this study. Especially worthy of mention on American developments are Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary Studies (New York, 1894), and Edward A. Krug, The Shaping of the American High School (New York, 1964); on the Bryce Commission, see A. M. Kazamias, Politics, Society and Secondary Education in England (Philadelphia, 1966); for reforms in France, consult Alexandre Ribot, La riforme de Venseignement secondaire (Paris, 1900), and Viviane Isambert-Jamati, "Une reforme des lycees et colleges," L'annee sociologique, 3d ser. 20 (1969):261-294; for the Russian developments, see Patrick L. Alston, Education and the State in Tsarist Russia (Stanford, Calif., 1969), Allen Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery (Chicago and London, 1979), and James C. McClelland, Au­ tocrats and Academics (Chicago and London, 1979).

INTRODUCTION

pare the reforms of German secondary education with devel­ opments in neighboring countries. Any historical study of education, and particularly any com­ parative study, contains explicit or implicit criteria for meas­ uring one educational system against another, or for meas­ uring a single system against an ideal of what "should have happened." Without positing absolute ideals, this study is interested in what constituted a successful "modernization"'8 of secondary education around 1900. In his recent book, Ed­ ucation and Society in Modern Europe, Fritz Ringer has pro­ posed three extremely useful, and quantifiable, criteria for comparing school systems: inclusiveness, progressiveness, and segmentation. By inclusiveness, Ringer means the percentage of an age group that is enrolled in any given level of education, with an obvious maximum of 100 percent. Progressiveness refers to the degree of equal opportunity provided by the system, measured by the relative accessibility of secondary and higher education to children from various social classes in comparison to the average for the society as a whole; the ultimate progressive system would have opportunity ratios of one to one for all social groups. Segmentation occurs in a •" In using the concept of "modernization," I do not mean to imply that there is a single process of change from some static condition known as tradition to another known as modernity; see the criticism of such use in Hans-Ulnch Wehler, Moderntsterungstheorte und Geschtchte (Gottingen, 1975). I want only to suggest that within the context of western education since 1800, certain general trends are discernible despite all national variations, and that movement in the direction of the "modern" structure can be com­ pared. In this study, I am not concerned with education as a contributing factor in economic growth and "modernization," but treat the educational system as lagging behind social and economic conditions and having, there­ fore, to be brought up to date. Peter Lundgreen has found the measurable impact of educational improvement on economic growth in nineteenth-century Germany to have been very small, but he notes the great difficulty of assessing qualitative improvements in instruction in a country where literacy was very high before significant industrialization began: Peter Lundgreen, with a contribution by A. P. Thirlwall, "Educational Expansion and Eco­ nomic Growth in Nineteenth-Century Germany," m Schooltng and Society, ed. Lawrence Stone (Baltimore and London, 1976).

INTRODUCTION

school system when different curricular tracks enroll pupils from significantly different social backgrounds; Ringer distin­ guishes vertical segmentation, where one tract clearly serves the social elite, from horizontal segmentation, where children from various social groups with the same status nonetheless attend different types of schools. Ringer argues that increased inclusiveness and progressiveness, and decreased segmenta­ tion, are desirable developments toward full equality of ed­ ucational opportunity, and he judges the German, French, and English educational systems since 1800 in the light of these variables.19 In the following chapters, I will make use of Ring­ er's criteria and his masterly compilation of statistics on en­ rollments, social origins, and career choices of secondary pu­ pils and university students, but will also suggest some modifications. Other criteria for judging the relative success of efforts to modernize secondary education in the late nineteenth century are less subject to quantification, especially those having to do with the spirit and values imparted in the classroom. Yet the type of issues raised by the Kaiser were of vital importance, and they do point to several general paths of development in western education. Under the rubric of the "demands of the present" can be placed the long-term trends toward the teach­ ing of more science and modern languages, and thus less Latin and Greek, to both early leavers and graduates of secondary schools, as well as efforts to delay and make less irrevocable the choice of educational tracks. Related to Wilhelm's concern about the dangerous overburdening of pupils with school work are the tendencies for schools at all levels to assume greater responsibility for pupils' health, including their physical ac­ tivity, and for secondary teachers to add significant training in pedagogy to their professional preparation. Although the Kaiser's interest in raising patriotic Germans in the schools •» Fritz K. Ringer, Education and Society in Modem Europe (Bloomington and London, 1979), pp. 21-31. This new work views the German case much more favorably than Ringer did in his first book, The Decline of the German Mandarins (Cambridge, Mass., 1969).

INTRODUCTION

can be seen easily as a step backward rather than a modern­ ization of education, when stripped of its dogmatic coloring this interest does mirror another set of general trends: the replacement of the study of antiquity by that of national lit­ erature and history as the humanistic core of secondary ed­ ucation, and the emergence of an explicit civic training in the schools that in many ways filled the gap left by the decline of formal religious instruction in the classroom. The movement toward equal educational opportunities for girls and women can be included under the general category of increased inclusiveness, but in all countries it constituted a separate "ques­ tion" that deserves its own detailed investigation.*0 In the following pages, the education of girls and women will be discussed primarily in relation to its impact on the reform of boys' secondary schools. The remainder of Part One will set the stage for the debate of the school question by examining the Gymnasium in theory and practice. The first chapter will offer a brief introduction to the German secondary schools as they developed during the first two thirds of the nineteenth century; the second will attempt to provide a basis for weighing the validity of the claims of reformers and conservatives after 1870 through an investigation of what foreign observers and Gymnasium pu­ pils had to say about the classical schools. Part Two, consisting of chapters 3, 4, and 5, will explore the three main criticisms of the Gymnasium in the 1870s and 1880s, as well as the changes that reformers recommended; each chapter will also examine the responses to these criticisms by the conservatives and the Prussian government. The succeeding three chapters of Part Three investigate in depth the Prussian school confer­ ences of 1890 and 1900, with special emphasis on the neg10 A sweeping but thin initial attempt to write a history of women's edu­ cation in Europe and America is Phyllis Stock's Better Than Rubies (New York, 1978); see also the older and more limited work by Yoshi Kasuya, A Comparative Study of the Secondary Education of Girls in England, Ger­ many, and the United States (New York, 1933). I have begun work on a study of the secondary and higher education of women in Imperial Germany.

INTRODUCTION

lected role of the Kaiser and of officials in the Ministry of Education; chapter 8 also includes a discussion of the evo­ lution of the issues between the two conferences. A final chap­ ter, as mentioned previously, compares the German experi­ ence of secondary school reform with contemporaneous developments in other countries; it also considers the general perspectives on culture, society, and politics in Imperial Ger­ many that the school question provides.

ONE

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN Bildung consists not in the possession of facts, but in the possession of lively powers of judgment and action. Friedrich Paulsen The simplest dunce who has an Abitur certificate in his pocket looks down on the great merchant or industrialist as a less gebildet man, and, what is worse, the latter often looks up to him. Gustav Volcker'

LTHOUGH its roots reached back to the Latin schools of the Middle Ages, the classical Gymnasium with which the Kaiser found so much fault in 1890 was essentially a product of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. It was shaped by a combination of an educational ideal ex­ pounded by some of the leading figures in the flowering of German culture around 1800, including Herder, Fichte, and Goethe, with the growing intervention of the Prussian state in the educational system. In the course of the nineteenth century, the Gymnasium developed into the cornerstone of the educational systems of all the German states; especially in Prussia, Gymnasium pupils and graduates gradually ob­ tained a wide variety of rights and privileges that enabled them to dominate the civil service and the professions. Central to the educational philosophy behind the Gymna­ sium was the notion of "Bildung" as formulated in Germany in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. As do its usual translations, "cultivation" and "education," Bildung referred to both the process and the result of a person's in1 Friedrich Paulsen, "Das moderne Bildungswesen," in Paul Hinneburg, ed., Die Kultur der Gegenwart, part 1: Die allgemeinen Grundlagen der Kultur der Gegenwart (Berlin and Leipzig, 1906), p. 54; Gustav Volcker, Die Schule und die soziale Frage (Schonebeck, 1891), p. 11.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN tellectual development. The early theorists of Bildung wanted to guarantee the individual freedom to develop his own talents to the greatest possible extent, and therefore resisted any equa­ tion of Bildung with training designed specifically for a future career. They generally viewed such practical instruction as symptomatic of a society based on hereditary estate rather than on human equality; they preferred that individuals not be forced into a mold by education for a trade until each had been given the opportunity to carry his Bildung as far as he could. Two overlapping conceptions of what the results of this process of Bildung would be coexisted in German thought at this time: whereas on the one hand the Romantic impulses behind the idea of each individual cultivating his innate talents suggested a broad diversity among the Gebildeten (those peo­ ple with a completed Bildung), the roots of Bildung in the Enlightenment and neoclassicism pointed to all true Gebil­ deten sharing a common rationality, idealism, morality, and aesthetic sensibility.1 In this opposition to an education based on one's hereditary estate, the ideal of Bildung contained a powerful democratic component. In German society of the early nineteenth century, however, where formal education for the overwhelming ma­ jority of the population amounted to learning only the rudi­ ments of reading, writing, arithmetic, and religion in over­ crowded one- or two-room schoolhouses, Bildung had an implicit bias in favor of the social groups whose leisure and money permitted them to pursue the cultivation of their talents and personalities. The new cultural ideal could and did serve as a weapon for elements in the middle class fighting against aristocratic privilege; indeed, many aristocrats came to accept Bildung as almost as important a measure of status as birth. Yet the ideal of Bildung in many ways was not "middle class" or "bourgeois" in the sense usually given to these terms; in 1 On the rise of the idea of Bildung, see Hans Weil, Die Entstehung des deutschen Bildungsprinzip (Bonn, 1930); Wilhelm Roessler, Die Entstehung des modernen Erziehungswesens in Deutschland (Stuttgart, 1961); and Wilhelm Richter, Der Wandel des Bildungsgedankens (Berlin, 1971).

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN its rejection of practicality and of purposeful work in the world in favor of a leisured cultivation of intellectual and aesthetic interests, Bildung stood in opposition to the values of the commercial and manufacturing classes. Within the Ger­ man society of the time, the new ideal appealed most strongly to those groups that would later be known as the Gebildeten, civil servants and professionals.3 This elective affinity between certain social groups and the ideal of Bildung became clear as the new educational ideal was institutionalized in the emerging state system of secondary schools. Throughout most of the eighteenth century, an in­ terest in obtaining more thoroughly trained civil servants for the state had led many educational reformers to argue that the universities must be revitalized; as a concomitant, only young men who were "ripe" for university studies should be admitted.* In Prussia, the most important step in this direction was the introduction of the first Abitur examination in 1787. Although the examination was not obligatory for all Latin schools, and its successful completion was not yet required for entering the universities, the new regulation served to ac­ centuate the differences between the larger schools whose pu­ pils were able to pass the examination and the lesser ones that did not offer an adequate preparation. An important goal of the new regulation was to spur the conversion of such lesser Latin schools into more practically oriented Biirgerschulen. By this differentiation between schools for future merchants ' On the class bias inherent in the notion of Btldung, see esp. part 1 of Ralph Fiedler, Die klassiscbe deutsche Btldungstdee (Weinheim, 1972). For the appeal of Btldung to segments of the middle class, see Lenore O'Boyle, "Klassische Bildung und soziale Struktur in Deutschland zwischen 1S00 und 1848," Htstortsche Zeitschnft 207 (1968):584-608; and the corrective in Charles E. McClelland, State, Society, and University in Germany, 17001914 (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 112-114. Onthe appeal of Btldung among the aristocracy, see Weil, Btldungsprtnztp, p. 221. « On university reform in the eighteenth century, McClelland, State, So­ ciety, and University, pp. 27-98, passim; on emerging notions of ripeness for university study, Hans-Georg Herrlitz, Studium als Standesprwileg (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1973), pp. 12, 51, 77. (I8)

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN and artisans and those for future civil servants and profes­ sionals, the Prussian authorities sharpened an existing division within the middle classes.5 The Abitur examination of 1787 included both Latin and Greek, but it did not associate these languages with the nascent ideal of Bildung. Only after the defeat of Prussia by Napoleon did Bildung, usually prefaced by the adjectives humanistic or classical, become synonymous with a secondary education centering on the study of the languages and literatures of ancient Greece and Rome. The man most responsible for the introduction of classical Bildung into Prussian secondary ed­ ucation was the aristocratic philologist and statesman Wilhelm von Humboldt. Although he served as the head of the education section of the Prussian Ministry of the Interior6 for only sixteen months in 1809-1810, Humboldt laid down the foundation for almost all the measures carried out by his successors. A firm believer in the exclusion of all practical training from schools designed to produce Bildung, Humboldt wrote in 1809, "If the two are mixed, Bildung becomes im­ pure, and one ends up with neither wholly developed human beings nor fully integrated members of the separate classes." He saw the goals of formal schooling as being to "exercise the memory, sharpen the understanding, correct the judgment, and refine the moral sense"; the specialized knowledge and skills needed for the pupils' future employment would be ob­ tained after leaving school. Contrary to the policy of his pred­ ecessors, Humboldt envisioned differentiation within the school system only in terms of the length of study; the Gymnasium would be the only secondary school, serving boys who did not expect to enter the universities as well as those who did.7 ' Herrlitz, Studium als Standesprivileg, pp. 90, 99-101; Karl-Ernst Jeismann, Das preussische Gymnasium in Staat und Gesellschaft (Stuttgart, 1974), pp. 82, 102. 6 The separate Ministry for Religious, Educational, and Medical Affairs was founded only in 1817. 7 Lothar Schweim, ed., Schulreform in Preussen, 1809-1819 (Weinheim, 1966), pp. 29,42; Eduard Spranger, Wilhelm von Humboldt und die Reform

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN

In assigning a major role in the Gymnasium to the ancient languages, especially Greek, Humboldt showed himself to be a loyal disciple of the neo-humanist Friedrich August Wolf. The first German to call himself a student of philology and later a professor at the University of Halle, Wolf had been instrumental in transmitting to a generation of scholars and teachers the enthusiasm for ancient Greece that had conquered the German intellectual world in the late eighteenth century; his fame as the developer of many methodological innovations in the study of language gave great weight to his views on secondary education. Wolf offered two important reasons why Greek should be part of an education for Bildung: the study of its grammar helped develop formal mental discipline, and its literature presented the pupil with the best available ex­ amples of human culture in an original, unmixed form.8 Hum­ boldt fully shared these beliefs, although he himself stressed the study of the Greek language as a pure, original expression of the human spirit more than did most of the neo-humanists. In no way did Humboldt conceive of instruction in the clas­ sical languages as preliminary training for future philologists; it was but the most important of many tools useful for the allgemeine, or general, Bildung of all pupils in the secondary schools. In addition to Latin and Greek, Humboldt's ideal Gymnasium would teach German, mathematics, physics, ge­ ography, history, and religion.9 des Bildungswesens (3d ed.; Tubingen, 1965), pp. 135-136. The literature on Humboldt is vast; the most accessible recent work is a projected twovolume biography by Paul R. Sweet, of which the first volume has appeared: Wilheltn von Humboldt, vol. 1: 1767-1808 (Columbus, 1978). 8 Carl Diehl, Americans and German Scholarship, 1770-1870 (New Haven and London, 1978), pp. 19-43; Paulsen, Geschichtedesgelehrten Unterrichts (2d ed.), 1:2,08-219. Still interesting on the German enthusiasm for the Greeks is E. M. Butler, The Tyranny of Greece over Germany (Cambridge, 1935), but see also Henry Hatfield, Aesthetic Paganism in German Literature (Cam­ bridge, Mass., 1964). The enthusiasm for Greece also served as a way to escape from the domination of French culture: O'Boyle, "Klassische Bildung," P- 59°· » Spranger, Humboldt, pp. 62,166-167; Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts (2d ed.), 2:200-202.

BILDUNG

AND THE

GEBILDETEN

There was certainly an inherent contradiction in prescribing the means by which individuals should best develop their own talents; that Humboldt, who in the 1790s had written several essays on the limits of state power, should involve himself with the creation of a state system of secondary education testifies to the powerful sense of the need for a revolution from above in the truncated Prussia after 1807.10 However, even the urgency of the reform era could not transform an educational system overnight, and implementing the plans for the classical Gymnasium proved to be a slow and incomplete process. The first important step came in July 1810, after Humboldt had resigned his post, when a decree was issued regulating the certification of teachers for the Prussian sec­ ondary schools. Until then, the patrons of the individual in­ stitutions—municipalities, foundations, the state, the king, or a combination of these—had been free to choose their own teachers, often young pastors waiting for a parish. Under the new arrangements, the patrons would have to choose from a group of teachers who had passed an examination adminis­ tered by the state if they wanted the schools to be considered as full-fledged Gymnasien. In accord with the views of both Humboldt and Wolf, the new examination concentrated al­ most exclusively on the candidate's scholarly qualifications to the neglect of his pedagogical abilities. At the time, when the philosophical faculties of the universities had not progressed far beyond offering an advanced secondary education and allgemetne Bildung, this lack of attention to teacher training posed no serious problems; but as the universities evolved more and more into institutions of research that produced scholars instead of teachers, this examination system, even with the changes made in the course of the nineteenth century, contained the seeds of undesirable repercussions on German secondary education.11 Among the many commentaries on Humboldt's changed position on state intervention, see Gerhard Giese, ed., Quellen zur deutscben Schulgeschichte seit 1S00 (Gottingen, 1961), p. 15. " A brief recapitulation of the various examinations for Prussian secondary teachers in the nineteenth century is contained in Josef Dolch, "Zur Ge-

(ZL)

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN The introduction of an obligatory curriculum for the Gym­ nasium, and an Abitur examination based on it, necessarily had to wait for the growth of a sufficient pool of qualified teachers. A recommended curriculum drawn up in 1812 by one of Humboldt's former subordinates, Johann Siivem, called for a ten-year Gymnasium, beginning after four years of el­ ementary school, that would teach ten years of Latin and eight of Greek, with mathematics and German also receiving sub­ stantial amounts of class time throughout the course. This curriculum, which called for thirty-two hours of classes per week in every grade, came under fire even from Wolf as de­ manding too much of the pupils. Consequently, it was never universally adopted.11 Siivern also issued revised regulations for the Abitur examination in 1812,, which included six writ­ ten and seven oral exercises. The severity of this examination continued the earlier policy of separating the Gymnasien from the lesser Latin schools: only ninety-one schools qualified as Gymnasien in the Prussia of 1818. Yet there was still a re­ luctance to exclude those who did not have an Abitur, espe­ cially aristocrats, from the university: an "unsatisfactory" grade on Suvern's Abitur did not prevent matriculation, and the universities themselves continued to offer separate entrance examinations to prospective students.13 Only in the 1830s, under the direction of Johannes Schulze, who headed the department for the secondary schools under Minister of Education von Altenstein from 1819 to 1840, did this flexibility regarding the curriculum and the Abitur disschichte des Paedagogicums der Gymnasiallehrer im 19. Jahrhundert," Zettschrift fur Padagogtk 9 (1963):10-24; on the way that certification affected the schools, see Jeismann, Das preusstsche Gymnasium, p. 321. " Paulsen, Geschtchte des gelehrten Unternchts (2d ed.), 2:288-290. For examples of the implementation of the curriculum on the local level, see Jeismann, Das preusstsche Gymnasium, pp. 372-395; and Klaus Sochatzy, Das neuhumamsttsche Gymnasium und die rem-menschltche Btldung (Gottingen, 1973). 13 Conrad Varrentrapp, Johannes Schulze und das hohere preusstsche Untemchtswesen in seiner Zett (Leipzig, 1899), pp. 360-362; Jeismann, Das preusstsche Gymnasium, pp. 357, 351.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN

appear. In 1834, after a rapid expansion of university enroll­ ments had created what seemed to be an excess of educated men in Germany, Schulze closed off all paths to the university except the Gymnasium by making the Abitur a prerequisite for matriculation.1* Only three years later, after receiving com­ plaints that the curriculum leading to the Abitur was too difficult,15 did Schulze present a revised plan, standardizing the Gymnasium as a nine-year school in six grades, with the three upper grades lasting two years each.16 As a student and friend of the philosopher Hegel, Schulze believed the Gym­ nasium should impart allgemeine Bildung, but he did not share as completely in the enthusiasm for ancient Greece as had the neo-humanists of the previous generation; in his curriculum, Greek lost time to Latin and French, which he introduced beginning in the fourth year. German and mathematics fell much further behind Latin and Greek in credit hours allotted, so that the classical languages together accounted for 46 per­ cent of the classroom time. In order to guarantee the "har­ monious" Bildung of all the pupils' talents, Schulze also de­ creed that promotion from one grade to the next would depend on the mastery of the material presented in all subjects.17 Neither the curriculum nor the Abitur underwent any major 14 Lenore O'Boyle, "The Problem of an Excess of Educated Men in Western Europe, 1800-1850," Journal of Modem History 42 (1970):473-478; Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 47-49; Varrentrapp, Johannes Schulze, pp. 375376. " See chapter 4, p. m of this book. 16 Like the French secondary school pupil, but opposite from the English and American, the Prussian boy advanced from the higher to the lower numbered grades, which were called Sexta, Quinta, Quarta, Untertertia, Obertertia, Untersekunda, Obersekunda, Unterprima, and Oberprima. 17 Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts (2d ed.), 2:351-352; Sochatzy, Das neuhumanistische Gymnasium, p. 155. These regulations for the Prussian secondary schools all took the form of ministerial decrees, not laws. A comprehensive education law drawn up by Siivern in 1819 was never published because of the turn to reactionary policies in that year. The Prussian constitution of 1850 promised that such a law would be enacted, but one was never passed, owing largely to religious conflicts. Prussian Ministers of Education continued to operate by means of decrees until 1918.

(2.3)

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN changes between the 1830s and the 1880s. During the era of reaction following 1848, Ludwig Wiese introduced a slight increase in the time devoted to religious instruction and a small reduction for science. Wiese also moved the start of French from the fourth to the second year, so that pupils began Latin in Sexta, French in Quinta, and Greek in Quarta;lS but such minor adjustments did little to dislodge the ancient lan­ guages from their dominant role in the Gymnasium. The clas­ sical school retained its monopoly over preparation for the university until 1870, and for most fields even longer, so that it became in a certain sense a "practical" preparation for future lawyers, physicians, pastors, and teachers, even if it did not offer specialized preliminary training for these professions. Several other characteristics of the classical Gymnasium are worthy of note in light of the later debate of the school ques­ tion. The antipathy of the neo-humanists for anything even remotely tainted with practical training meant that the Gym­ nasium neglected the contribution that manual skills might make to Bildung; even drawing played at best a tertiary role in a Gymnasium education. The educational value of gym­ nastics and games also failed to impress the Prussian author­ ities, especially after Father Jahn's gymnastic associations were banned for their political radicalism in 1819. Although the Gymnasium's monopoly over preparing pupils for the uni­ versities meant that it would educate all higher civil servants, most of whom were lawyers, it did not offer much introduc­ tion to the political and social realities of German life; after 1819, the Gymnasium was supposed to prevent "immature judgments" about "current political conditions" by steering clear of the present in history instruction.19 In the other German states, the evolution of secondary ed•8 Paulsen, Gescbicbte desgelehrten Unterrtehts (id ed.), 1:486-520; Ludwig Wiese, Lebensermnerungen und Amsterfahrungen (2 vols.; Berlin, 1886), 1:178-183. •» Fiedler, Dte klasstsehe deutsehe Bildungstdee, p. 9; Varrentrapp, Johan­ nes Schulze, p. 298; Ernst Weymar, Das Selbstverstandms der Deutsehen (Stuttgart, 1961), p. 108.

(Μ)

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN ucation in the early nineteenth century followed a wide variety of paths, but the final results were generally institutions not unlike the humanistic classical Gymnasium in Prussia. In the smaller northern states with only a handful of secondary schools, imitation of neighboring Prussia was virtually the only option open to the authorities. In the larger states, where neo-humanism had independent roots, greater diversity reigned: in Bavaria and Wiirttemberg, for example, the old Latin schools continued to exist, offering a few years of Greek to boys interested in going on to four-year Gymnasien that were equiv­ alent to the upper grades of the Prussian classical schools. The most important factor pushing the schools of the many states toward uniformity was the tradition of German university students attending several universities, often in different states, in the course of their academic work. Consequently, this made reciprocal recognition of the Abitur, and thus similarity in the curricula, a necessity.10 By the time of Johannes Schulze's revision of the Abitur examination and of the curriculum in the 1830s, a Gymnasium education had already become an important source of social status. In rural districts, a town with a Gymnasium often served as something of a cultural center, with a concentration of university graduates as teachers and pupils drawn from the surrounding countryside. The close association of classical Bildung with the heroes of the German cultural revival lent a special prestige to being gebildet, beyond that usually as­ sociated with education. Bildung also acquired its practical advantages, especially in Prussia. Most important was the exclusive right of Gymnasium graduates to enter the univer­ sities and, after the required years of study, to take state ex­ aminations for the civil service, the ministry, medical and legal practice, and secondary teaching. In a society where neither *° Paulsen, Geschtchtedesgelehrten Untemehts (2d ed.), 2:403-441; Franz Schnabel, Deutsche Gesehichte im neunzehntenJahrhundert (4 vols.; Freiburg im Breisgau, 1929-1937), 2:354-357; Hans Loewe, Die Entwieklung des Schulkampfs in Bayern bis zum vollstandigen Steg des Neuhumamsmus (Ber­ lin, 1917).

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN industry nor politics yet offered significant opportunities for advancement and prestige, these professions, with their ex­ ercise of power over people rather than things, gave high status to former Gymnasium pupils.21 Over the years, the middle levels of the civil service also became the preserve of former Gymnasium pupils, as the authorities in various ministries took advantage of the selective mechanism existing in the schools to establish minimum educational requirements for their subordinates. Many of these privileges did not demand graduation from the Gymnasium, but only completion of six to eight years of schooling; boys received the privileges not so much because of what they knew as for the allgemeine Bildung that their years at a Gymnasium were presumed to have produced. In a society where the bureaucracy was held in such high esteem as in Prussia, even these subordinate po­ sitions conferred considerable prestige/2 A privilege unique to the Prussian secondary schools until the 1860s was the right of pupils who had reached a certain point in their education to serve as "one-year volunteers" in the army instead of as regular two-year (later three-year) con­ scripts. After universal military service had been introduced during the Prussian reform era, the military reformer Her­ mann von Boyen instituted the one-year-volunteer privilege as a partial compensation to the urban middle classes formerly exempt from service; it was specifically intended to minimize " O'Boyle, "A Possible Model," p. 240. The notion that in German society of the early nineteenth century the Gebildeten formed a special "mandarin" caste whose status was based on education rather than on birth or wealth is explored more thoroughly m Ringer's Decline of the German Mandarins, esp. pp. 1-13, 15-42. The best illustration of the status of the Gebildeten in mid-nineteenth-century Germany is the fact that over 80 percent of the mem­ bers of the Frankfurt Parliament elected in 1848 were university graduates and almost 95 percent had attended a Gymnasium: see Frank Eyck, The Frankfurt Parliament, 1848-49 (London, 1968), p. 95. " On the status and life-style of these lower civil servants, see Hans]oachim Henning, Das westdeutsche Burgertum in der Epoche der Hochindustrtaltsterung, 1860-1914, part 1: Das Btldungsburgertum in der preusstschen Westprovmzen (Wiesbaden, 1972), pp. 75, and 117-260, passim.

(z 6)

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN the disruption of young men's scholarly pursuits. At first, individual commanders decided who should be considered worthy of this privilege, but in the 1820s it was restricted to boys who had completed the fourth, then later the fifth, grade at a Gymnasium, or had passed a special examination. In the last third of the nineteenth century, when the one-year-vol­ unteer privilege was extended with the Prussian military sys­ tem to the rest of Germany, the general requirement was suc­ cessful completion of Untersekunda.23 This privilege, which later in the century also opened up the opportunity to become an officer in the reserve, gradually evolved from being a means to ease the pursuit of another end to being an end in itself: many of the boys who reached the end of Untersekunda left the Gymnasium at that point with the privilege certificate in their pockets. Possession of this certificate also served as a pseudo-Abitur for some jobs in the private sector, where com­ panies often advertised available positions as requiring the one-year-volunteer privilege.24 Between 1800 and 1850, close to half of all Abiturienten who went on to study at the universities were sons of fathers who themselves were civil servants or professionals.25 Recent scholarship, however, has challenged the old assumption that the Gymnasium in this period served primarily as the second­ ary school for this self-perpetuating academic elite. Detlef l'Schnabel, Deutsche Geschichte, 2:315-317; Schmeding, Entwtcklung des realtsttschen hoheren Schulwesens, p. 32; Peter Treutlein, Geschiehtltehe Entwteklung des Etniahrtg-Freiwtlligen Berechttgungswesens in Deutsehland (Hamburg, 1891), pp. 11-15, 35. Walter Ruegg, "Bildung und Gesellschaft im 19. Jahrhundert," in Hans Steffen, ed., Btldung und Gesellsehaft (Gottingen, 1972), p. 36; Herwig Blankertz, Bildung im Zeitalter der grossen Industrie (Hannover, 1969), pp. 107—108. Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 301-302; Konrad Jarausch, "Die neuhumanistische Umversitat und die burgerhche Gesellschaft," in Darstellungen und Quellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Etnhettsbewegung ttn neunzehnten und zwanztgsten Jahrhundert (Heidelberg, 1981), 11:37-39. Jelsmann estimates that in some early Gymnasien the percentage of graduates whose fathers were Gebildeten surpassed 70 percent: Das preussische Gym­ nasium, p. 166.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN Miiller's work on Berlin and Margaret Kraul's study of six other cities and towns have suggested that before 1848 the Gymnasium did fulfill Humboldt's ideal of being a compre­ hensive secondary school, if not for sons of peasants and laborers, at least for most elements of the middle and upper classes. Their works have also shown how irregular were the age of enrollment and the length of attendance for Gymnasium pupils during these years, with one-third of them staying two years or less and only about zo percent of the Quartaner going on to achieve the Abitur.16 In such circumstances, it is certainly questionable whether the classical schools served the educa­ tional needs of many of their pupils or provided the social integration that Humboldt hoped for and that Muller and Kraul suggest did occur. That so many boys attended a Gymnasium for only a few years occurred in part because in many areas there was no alternative except the one-room schoolhouse. Some towns that could not support a full Gymnasium had Progymnasien, which lacked the last two grades of the nine-year course; other towns, particularly in the 1820s, began to found schools that aimed at satisfying the more practical needs of the commercial and 16 Muller, Sozialstruktur und Schulsystem, pp. 41, 463, and passim; Mar­ garet Kraul, Gymnasium und Gesellschaft im Vormarz (Gortingen, 1980), esp. pp. 143-148. See also Kurt Hammench, "Die soziale Herkunft von Schulern als Thema schulpohtischer Argumentation," Kolner Zeitsehnft fur Soziologie und Soztalpsychologte 32 (1980):457-483. Peter Lundgreen has criticized Muller's inclusion of some private schools that apparently provided more of an elementary education among the secondary schools of Berlin before 1848; their inclusion makes the social recruitment of secondary pupils in the first half of the century appear broader than it was: "Die Bildungschancen beim Uebergang von der 'Gesamtschule' zum Schulsystem der Klassengesellschaft im 19. Jahrhundert," Zeitschnft fur Padagogtk 24 (1978): 101-115. Kraul does not have information on length of attendance or last grade attended for roughly two-thirds of the pupils she studied in her six towns; because she does have records of those receiving the Abituri one must assume that all these pupils left school before graduation. I do not see that she has any basis for concluding that the year or two spent by many boys from the lower middle class at a Gymnasium helped to open "new educational perspectives" for them; Kraul, Gymnasium und Gesellsehaft, p. 148.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN industrial classes for young men who knew elements of math­ ematics, science, modern languages, and manual skills not taught in the elementary schools. These modern schools were virtually unregulated in their early years, and operated under a confusing welter of different names—Realschulen, Biirgerschulen, town schools, trade schools, technical schools. In Prussia, most were organized and financed by the municipal­ ities, but the state did support the intermediate and advanced technical schools, the Gewerbeschulen and Gewerbeakademie.17 Johannes Schulze accepted the need for higher BiirgerschuIen and their cousins because he preferred that boys not plan­ ning to go to the universities stay out of the Gymnasium. This was a break with Humboldt's views that had the potential to turn the Gymnasium from an institution of Bildung into one of Vorbildung, or preparation, for the universities. In 1832, Schulze issued the first regulations for the Prussian higher Biirgerschulen, not dictating a curriculum but establishing a final examination that would qualify the graduate for the oneyear-volunteer privilege, entry into middle-level positions in the civil service, and admission to schools of mining, archi­ tecture, and forestry. At the time, only nine schools taught sufficient Latin to satisfy the requirements for this new ex­ amination; by 1859, however, the lure of these privileges had led to the creation or modification of forty-seven more Real­ schulen and higher Biirgerschulen that did teach enough Latin, Latin that led these schools away from their original purposes and was not welcomed by many teachers. This expansion occurred even though these schools fell into official disfavor in the 1850s because of the supposed link between the "ma­ terialism" of their curriculum and the revolution of 1848; in 1856, architects in the civil service succeeded in having the 17 Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Vnterriehts (2d ed.), 2:539-549; Schmeding, Entwieklung des realistischen hoheren Schulwesens, pp. 16-34; Heinrich-Wilhelm Brandau, Die mittlere Bildung in Deutschland (Weinheim, 1959)» pp· 158-2-34-

BILDUNG

AND THE

GEBILDETEN

right to study at the architectural academy withdrawn from graduates of the Realschulen.28 The Realschulen did return to greater official favor under the more liberal "New Era" in Prussia. In 1859, Ludwig Wiese, who was himself a holdover from the period of reaction and would continue to head the department for the secondary schools until 1875, carried through a restructuring and re­ classification of the modern schools that established three types. The first-class Realschule—after 1882, the Realgymnasium— was a nine-year school in which Latin was taught in all grades, but much less than at the Gymnasium; the seven-year higher Burgerschule stood in the same relation to the first-class Realschule as the Progymnasium did to the Gymnasium; and the less clearly defined second-class Realschule could be of six or seven years, usually without Latin. All three schools began, like the Gymnasium, after three or four years of elementary school. The official decree establishing them stated that the first-class Realschuie would occupy a coordinated position with the Gymnasium, preparing boys for the technical insti­ tutes and technical careers in the civil service—forestry, min­ ing, architecture, postal service—but not for the universities. The next few years saw a repetition of what had happened after the first regulations in 1832: although only twenty-six schools qualified as first-class Realschulen in 1859, within five years the lure of these privileges raised this number to fiftyone. Clearly, many municipal officials did not consider the Gymnasium to be an adequate comprehensive secondary school, but at the same time they grasped the importance of privileges obtainable only through compliance with government regu­ lations.29 18 Varrentrapp, Johannes Schulze pp. 362-364, 412; Paulsen, Geschiehte des gelehrten Unterrichts, 2:543-552; Schmeding, Entwieklung des realistisehen hoheren Sehulwesens, pp. 34, 50-52; Miiller, Sozialstruktur und Sehulsystem, p. 204. '» Paulsen, Gesehiehte des gelehrten Unterrichts, 2:553-558; Schmeding, Entwicklung des realistischen hoheren Sehulwesens, pp. 57-61; Wiese, Lebenserinnerungen, 1:210-211.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN In most of the other German states, which did not have the one-year-volunteer privilege until 1867 or 1871, the Realschulen and higher Burgerschulen remained more closely at­ tached to their original goal of providing an intermediate form of education for the urban middle classes.'0 All German mod­ ern schools suffered from a much lower prestige than their classical counterparts; their practically oriented curricula did not share in the aura of classical Bildung, and their graduates obtained very few of the privileges of the holder of a Gym­ nasium Abitur. Memoirs of men who attended secondary schools in the late nineteenth century contain many references to battles of insults and fists between Gymnasium pupils and those they considered to be "practical hacks" or "illiterates."'1 The various technical institutes in Germany, most of which were founded in the 1820s and 1830s, suffered from a similar inferiority in their relations with the universities. For example, technical institutes accepted young men without a classical Abitur and were not able to grant higher degrees; while some­ one attending a university was a "student," at a technical institute he was usually still a "pupil."'1 The idealist ideology of the Gymnasium and the Gebildeten conquered many Germans engaged in "practical" activity. As the successful businessman Gustav von Mevissen noted rue­ fully in 1879, "In most cases, the position of the future heads of great commercial establishments in Germany is not one >° For an example of developments in one other state, see Rudolf W. Keck, Geschichte der mittleren Schule in Wiirttemberg (Stuttgart, 1968), pp. 169— 246. >' Friedrich Glum, Zwisehen Wissenschaft, Wirtsehaft und Politik (Bonn, 1964), p. 31; Franz Oppenheimer, Erlebtes, Erstrebtes, Erreichtes (Diisseldorf, 1964), p. 16; Max Halbe, Seholle und Sehieksal (Munich, 1933), p. 166.

Wilhelm Treue, "Zur Gesellschafts- und Berufsgeschichte des deutschen Ingenieurs," Technikgesehiehte 45 (1978):29, 31; McClelland, State, Society, and University, p. 214. I have adopted Ringer's use of the term technical institute to cover a variety of institutions that later in the century became known as Technische Hochschulen (a "high school" was higher than a "higher school") and in the twentieth century became the technical universities.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN that gives much inner satisfaction. The young merchant, whose Gymnasium education has faded from memory, feels himself inferior to all those persons who have been further exposed to the realm of knowledge through university studies. He sinks more and more into a one-sided pursuit of luxury and comfort. . . . The gap between property and true Bildung grows wider as he grows older, and the consciousness of this gap becomes increasingly oppressive to the more talented individuals."33 The gap would seem even wider for those who had not even been to a Gymnasium. The Gymnasium pupil, in his separate school building and easily identifiable cap, became aware of belonging to a special caste quite early in life; in 1890, a former pupil referred to the classical schools as "our mousetowers, from which we looked down with sovereign disdain upon the rest of the world."3·· In the course of the nineteenth century, the growth of private elementary schools attached to the Gymnasien— something opposed to the plans of both Humboldt and Sil­ vern—heightened this isolation of the future Gebildeten from the overwhelming majority of the population. These private Vorschulen, charging higher fees but with smaller classes and better teachers, offered the chance to reach the Gymnasium after three years instead of four; by the 1890s, they taught the basic skills to about half of the future secondary pupils.35 This separation of the Gebildeten from the people led such leading professors as Max Weber, Gustav Schmoller, and Friedrich Paulsen to argue that differences in Bildung pre­ sented as great a social problem for Imperial Germany as did differences in wealth.36 » Joseph Hansen, Gustav von Mevtssen (2 vols.; Berlin, 1906), 2:629. " Danztger Zeitung, 16 September 1890. » Helmut Sienknecht, Der Etnhettsschulgedanke (Weinheim, 1968), pp. 59—66. When the Vorschulen were abolished under the Weimar Republic, they were still producing 42 percent of the secondary school pupils: see Titze, Pohttsterung der Erztehung, p. 199. '* Gustav Schmoller, "Das untere und mittlere gewerbliche Schulwesen m Preussen," in ZurSoztal- und Gewerbepoltttk der Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1890), p. 276; Max Weber, "Wahlrecht und Demokratie in Deutschland," in Ge-

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN It need hardly be mentioned that all that has been said so far applied only to schools for boys. Until after 1871, sec­ ondary education for girls, to the extent that the term is ap­ propriate at all, was virtually unregulated; almost all "higher girls' schools" were the result of local initiatives. Such schools lasted only until age fifteen or sixteen, taught neither Latin nor Greek and very little science, and provided none of the privileges that graduation from boys' secondary schools did. The only form of advanced education open to women was pedagogical training that prepared them to teach in the ele­ mentary schools or the lower grades of the higher girls' schools.'7 Although the demands for better educational and career op­ portunities for women arose at approximately the same time as the debate over the school question for boys, the two proc­ esses remained largely independent; in the following chapters, the important points of contact will be discussed. This then was the secondary school system that Kaiser Wilhelm II and many other Germans wanted to reform in 1890. Although it had its peculiarities, its uniqueness should not be exaggerated. German secondary education in the nineteenth century was neither more socially exclusive nor more slavishly devoted to the classics than was French, English, or Russian; the Prussian Gymnasium, in fact, explicitly served as a model for Russian classical schools with the same name. The French notion of "culture generate" and the English and American ideal of a "liberal education," although seldom as fully and consciously elaborated as the German ideal of Bildung, aimed at essentially the same goal: the cultivation of young men with disciplined minds and a refined sense of human cultural values, but not professional expertise. The classical schools of France and England shared the antiutilitarian rhetoric of the Gym­ nasium: a historian of French education between 1848 and sammelte Pohttsche Schnften, ed. Johannes Wmckelmann (id ed., enl.; Tu­ bingen, 1958), pp. 235-236; Fnednch Paulsen, The German Universities, trans. Edward Delavan Perry (New York and London, 1895), pp. 119-123. " Stock, Better Than Rubies, pp. 133-134; Kasuya, Secondary Education of Girls, p. 50.

BILDUNG

AND THE

GEBILDETEN

1870 has concluded, "A general classical education was still seen as the best qualification for entry to any career," while a recent study of the English public schools in the nineteenth century suggested that "mathematics and modern languages were linked in the [pupil's] mind with the non-gentry problem of finding a job." The graduate of a Prussian Gymnasium in 1870 had probably learned more science than his French, English, or Russian counterpart.'8 With regard to the social composition and function of the classical schools, the similarities between the situation in Ger­ many and that in other major European countries are again more striking than the differences. According to the same historian of French education, Frenchmen considered their lycees to be both "an essential guarantee of the bourgeoisie's social conquests" and a "defense against pressure from be­ low." The rise of the English public schools above the ordinary grammar schools, combined with the unique position of Ox­ ford and Cambridge in English higher education, made for an even smaller, more self-conscious educated elite.39 Enroll­ ments in the Russian Gymnasien lagged significantly behind those in the Prussian classical schools for much of the nine­ teenth century, despite the great discrepancy in population; as late as 1881, 47 percent of Russian Gymnasium pupils came from the nobility.40 All three countries developed equiv­ alents to the German Vorschulen in the course of the century, >8 C. Bougie, The French Conception of "Culture Generate" and Its Influ­ ence upon Instruction (New York, 1938), p. 8; M. L. Clarke, Classical Ed­ ucation in England, if 00-1900 (Cambridge, 1959), pp. 75-76; Robert D. Anderson, Education in France, 1848—1870 (Oxford, 1975), p. 26; T. W. Bamford, The Rise of the Public Schools (London, 1967), pp. 119, 62. " Robert D. Anderson, "Secondary Education in Mid-Nineteenth-Century France," Past and Present 53 (1971):123; David Newsome, Godliness and Good Learning (London, 1961), pp. 9-25; Kazamias, Politics, Society and Secondary Education, pp. 19, 21; Rupert Wilkinson, Gentlemanly Power (London, 1964), pp. ιχ, 3-4, 64, 82; N. G. Annan, "The Intellectual Aris­ tocracy," in J. H. Plumb, ed., Studies in Social History (London and New York, 1955), passim. •>° Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, p. 101.

BILDUNG AND THE GEBILDETEN creating a similar isolation of the educated strata from the rest of the population. In England, the lack of state regulation of secondary edu­ cation and the survival of a small civil service based on pa­ tronage until after the middle of the nineteenth century meant that there was not the intimate link between the schools and the state service that existed in Prussia; that legal and medical training continued to take place outside the universities also meant differences from the German experience. In France and Russia, however, the classical schools came to exercise a mo­ nopoly over preparation for the universities and the civil serv­ ice that was very similar to the German situation. In all the countries, the modern schools suffered from the same secondclass citizenship as did the Realschulen in Germany.*1 As chapter ι will show, foreign educators found much to admire in the Prussian secondary schools of the late nineteenth century, an important point to remember in the light of the myriad demands for their reform. Yet the age of Wilhelm II was not the age of Humboldt or Johannes Schulze, and as the Kaiser's speech to the Prussian school conference of 1890 made clear, the new age raised demands that the old educa­ tional system did not fulfill. ' Ludwig Thoma, "Erinnerungen," in his Gesammelte Werke, vol. 1 (Mu­ nich, 1956), p. 93. See also Muller, Garten der Vergangenhett, p. 177; and Emil Ludwig, Gifts of Life, trans. M. 1. Robertson (Boston, 1931), p. 62. « Favorable judgments of German instruction in Gurlitt, Der Deutsche und seine Schule, p. 9; and Fnedensburg, Lebensertnnerungen, p. 19. 40 Binding, Erlebtes Leben, pp. 87-88, 75; Thoma, "Erinnerungen," p. 83; Miiller, Garten der Vergangenhett, pp. 186-187; Hellpach, Wtrken in Wirren, 1:70; Fritz Homeyer, Etn Leben fur das Buch (Aschaffenburg, 1961), pp. 28-29; Hermann Sinsheimer, Gelebt in Paradies (Munich, 1953), P- I2·

THE GYMNASIUM

unanimous in their condemnation of the "hurrah patriotism" practiced in the schools, particularly in association with the annual celebration of Sedan Day. Members of the volktsch movement as well as liberals attacked this bombast; both viewed it less as an evil than as a hollow and ineffectual means of developing a healthy love of country.-*1 A handful of men also noted a gradual change in the teaching corps after 1870, from "unworldly scholars" to "modern" and "patriotic" civil servants and reserve officers, but they do not analyze what effect this had.41 The most common accusation leveled at teachers concerned not their excess of patriotic zeal, but their total lack of sym­ pathy with and for their pupils. Whereas many foreign ob­ servers admired the pedagogical training of teachers in the German secondary schools, most of the boys taught by them viewed the majority as incapable of understanding or inspiring young minds. Friedrich Meinecke characterized the faculty of the Kollnsche Gymnasium in Berlin as "time-servers" not to be approached outside of class; Rudolf Binding believed that in his school days closer relations between pupils and teachers were "neither sought nor desired by either side." According to Emil Ludwig, "The feeling that teachers were machines to be turned on and off rather than sentient beings, that they belonged to the realm of mechanics rather than that of zo­ ology, was one common to many schoolboys of that day. As far as I myself was concerned, there was something symbolical in the distance between the teacher's desk and the school benches."43 The infrequent bridging of this gap meant that In 1891, the Progressive Heinnch Rickert commented that he had sent

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" surrounding the foundation of the new German Reich in 1871 had begun to calm down, teachers at Realschulen started to organize on a regional basis to press for more privileges for their pupils. In 1872, fifty-seven towns appealed to the House of Deputies to grant the semiclassical schools full equality with the Gymnasien; Wiese, however, succeeded in convincing the Education Committee to transmit the petitions to the Min­ istry of Education simply as material for consideration in the framing of Falk's comprehensive school bill." This first success for the Realschulen may also be said to have initiated the debate of the school question in Imperial Germany. Until Miihler's unexpected decree in 1870, the ed­ ucational conservatives had paid little attention to the de­ mands for parity for the first-class Realschulen; in their view, all Realschulen had been created to provide a second-rate secondary education and continued to do so. After 1870, how­ ever, a very vocal opposition to this invasion of the universities by graduates of the Realschulen was aroused, an opposition that combined honest doubts about the value of a Realschule education, more general hostility to change in a system that the admiration of foreigners suggested was working well, and concern on the part of lawyers, physicians, and others that inclusion of such Ungebildeten in their ranks would damage their social status. Wiese had foreshadowed this last concern in speaking to the Education Committee in 1868; at that time, he suggested that physicians and lawyers "could not do with­ out classical Bildung because of their important social posi­ tion."11 Such concerns apparently did not apply to teachers at Realschulen. his son to a Realgymnasium with the expectation that the medical faculties would be open by the time he graduated: SB, XV11:3, p. 2,150. •• Schmeding, Entwicklung des realistischen hoheren Schulwesens, pp. 6872; P] 31 (1873):323-330; COIR ι (1873):647-667; Lexis, ed., Reform des hoheren Schulwesens, pp. 65-66; SB, XI:3a, pp. 1,474—1,485. " Centralblatt, 1869, p. 158. In his memoirs, however, Wiese said that the opening of medical studies to Realgymnasium graduates was inevitable: Lebenserinnerungen, 2:57.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" Duringthe 1870s and 1880s, defenders of the Gymnasium's monopoly over preparation for the universities published scores of books, pamphlets, and articles attacking the presumption that Realschulen that offered so much "practical" education could possibly prepare pupils for the world of German schol­ arship. The advocates of classical Bildung used all the terms of scorn in the lexicon of German idealism to denigrate the education given in the first-class Realschulen, labeling it "ma­ terialist," "realist," and "utilitarian." They belittled the qual­ ity of the average Realschule graduate, without admitting that these schools could not attract the best pupils because they offered so few privileges at graduation. Over the years, partly in response to the demands of the more radical reformers, the conservatives developed the attitude that there could be no question of a long-term coexistence of the two nine-year schools: the choice was Gymnasium or Realschule. If the semiclassical schools offered the same rights as the Gymnasien, the friends of the old ways feared that pupils would abandon the classical schools entirely because, as one conservative put it, "The Abitur is easier, quicker, and therefore cheaper to obtain at a Realschule."1' Whether or not such a shift in school popu­ lations would occur could be ascertained only if the experi­ ment of equal privileges for graduates was tried, but these fears revealed a surprising lack of confidence by the conser­ vatives in the intrinsic attractiveness of classical Bildung to German boys and their parents. As support for the first-class Realschulen grew, some op­ ponents of university privileges for their graduates went so far as to deny these schools the right to exist. Tycho Momm·' ZfGW 28 (1874):387; Gustav Week, Das deutsche Gymnasium (Ratibor, 1874), p. 5; August Wilhelm Hofmann, Die Frage der Tetlung der phtlosophischen Facultat (id ed.; Berlin, 1881), p. 29; Adolf Kirchhoff, Rede bei Antritt des Rectorats (Berlin, 1883), p. 12; A. J. Reisacker, Gymnasium und Realschule (Berlin, 1882), p. 10; Lothar Meyer, "Ueber akademische Lemireiheit," Nord und Sud 10 (1879):21. The Abitur could not be obtained more quickly at the first-class Realschulen, except to the extent that many Gymnasium pupils took longer than the prescribed nine years.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" sen, brother of the famous historian and himself a distin­ guished Gymnasium director, considered a secondary school with Latin but not Greek "an abortion"; to the philosopher Eduard von Hartmann and the historian Heinrich von Treitschke, the mixture of classical and modern education in such a school resulted in an institution that was "neither fish nor fowl."14 In Treitschke's opinion, "The classical-historical and technical instruction must fall into their perfectly natural divisions, and be conducted upon parallel lines. No one can deny that they each require a totally different attitude of mind, therefore they must be carefully kept separate from each other, a necessity that has been lost sight of in Germany."1' This separation of practical training from education for Bildung had its roots in Humboldt's thinking, but in the late nineteenth century it masked another belief of the conservatives: a purely modern secondary school could not raise the demand for uni­ versity privileges as easily as the semiclassical school could. Theodor Mommsen occupied a unique position in this regard: he agreed that Latin without Greek had litde educational value, but displayed a highly unorthodox receptivity to the possi­ bility of a nine-year modern school, "as it could and should be," growing up beside the Gymnasium. He admitted that "the future presumably belongs to such schools."16 More typ­ ical of the conservatives, however, was Hermann Bonitz, who in 1875 published an article characterizing the inclusion of Latin in the first-class Realschulen as unfortunate and sug­ gesting that the way to deal with empty upper grades was not by expanding privileges but by reducing such schools to higher Biirgerschulen.17 That Falk, shortly thereafter, chose Bonitz ·* Tycho Mommsen, "Sechzehn Thesen zur Frage iiber die Gymnasialreform," P] 34 (1874):168; Eduard von Hartmann, Zur Reform des hoheren Schulwesens (Berlin, 1875), P- 1S; Heinrich von Treitschke, Politics, trans. Blanche Dugdale and Torben de Bille (2 vols.; New York, 1916), 1:372. •' Treitschke, Politics, 1:372. 16 DndS ι (1889):38. " Hermann Bonitz, "Die gegenwartige Reformfragen in unseren hoheren Schulwesen," PJ 35 (1875):149, 154.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" to replace the retiring Wiese seemed to portend a reversal of the policy of 1870 and helped to spur the foundation of the Realschulmanner Association in order to defend the position already won. In this atmosphere, the first Realschule graduates to ma­ triculate at the universities were understandably subject to scrutiny. In 1876 and again in 1878, Falk asked the professors of sciences and modern languages about their experiences to date with such students. The responses did not reveal a con­ sensus, although language professors tended to be more neg­ ative than scientists. Adolf Tobler, a professor of French at Berlin, regretted in 1876 that he had not yet had sufficient experience with such students to justify the uneasiness that the original decree had aroused in him; professors at Halle asked that the privilege to study modern languages be with­ drawn. In 1878, when the number of such students had risen to over 600, professors of sciences and languages at Marburg and Gottingen found graduates of first-class Realschulen equal to their fellow students from Gymnasien; but Gustav Korting of Miinster, Adolf Tobler, and others still complained about their inadequate preparation for the study of languages.18 Falk took no immediate action in response to either of these sets of opinions, which led those interested in a repeal of Miihler's decree to publicize their discontent. As the propor­ tion of Realschule graduates choosing to take advantage of the opportunity to enter the philosophical faculties rose to nearly 50 percent in 1879, the student of modern languages with classical training was quickly becoming an endangered species at some universities: at the small University of Greifswald in 1881, only fourteen of fifty-three students of French and English had attended a Gymnasium. With this danger added to the earlier prejudices against the semiclassical schools, the philosophical faculties in Berlin, Breslau, Halle, Greifswald, and Kiel asked the Ministry of Education to restrict the study and teaching of modern languages to Gymnasium grad18 Professors' reports in ZStA-Il, KM, Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. 12., vols. II and III.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT"

uates.19 The victory embodied in Miihler's decree appeared threatened, and the Realschulmanner's cause would have been bleak indeed if another "demand of the present" on the Gym­ nasium had not thrown further doubt on the merits of its near monopoly over preparation for the universities.

THE DEMANDS OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE

The failure to provide an adequate supply of teachers for the Realschulen was only a minor failing on the part of the Gym­ nasium. Much more serious was a growing conviction that the two hours per week of physics that it offered in the upper grades, supplemented by no chemistry or biology, gave pupils a strikingly insufficient preparation for increasingly sophisti­ cated university courses in science and medicine. As early as 1862, the physicist Hermann von Helmholtz had pointed out "a notable laxity and uncertainty of thought" among Gym­ nasium graduates who were unfamiliar with scientific pro­ cedures. Miihler gave some cognizance to this problem in the late 1860s, as did several professors in 1870, when they were asked their opinions about opening the universities to Realschule graduates.20 By the mid-i870s such remarks became commonplace, as many professors of science and medicine throughout Germany complained that the students reaching the universities were not adequately prepared for the work that they had to do there. World-famous scholars such as Rudolf Virchow, Emil DuBois-Reymond, and Karl Vogt, sup­ ported by many lesser figures, asserted that pupils simply did not learn to think and to observe scientifically at the Gymnasien. Often coupled to the scientists' criticisms was the charge '> Johannes Conrad, The German Universities for the Last Fifty Years, trans. John Hutchinson (Glasgow, 1885), p. 224. The appeals, dated between March 1880 and March 1882, are in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. 12, vol. IV; that from the University of Berlin is published as an appendix to Hofmann, Teilung der philosophischen Facultat. 10 Hermann von Helmholtz, Vortrage und Reden (2 vols.; 4th ed.; Braun­ schweig, 1896), 1:179; Centralblatt, 1869, p. 49. For the faculty opinions, see note 8 in this chapter.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" found in so many autobiographies of pupils from these years: the classical schools did not even inspire enthusiasm for Greek and Latin very well anymore.11 Nor were such opinions con­ fined to scientists: in 1874, the historian Heinrich von Sybel admitted this failure to train pupils' powers of observation, adding that he also saw a "growing deficit" between the goals of instruction in the ancient languages and the actual achieve­ ments." This issue took on a special importance in the late 1870s not only because the Realschulmanner were pressing for the opening of the medical faculties, but also because the Bundesrat had established a commission to review medical edu­ cation and certification, which was, in Imperial Germany, a national rather than a state matter. Two options obviously existed for improving the preparation given future medical students: the Gymnasium might allot more time to the sciences and to drawing as a means to develop habits of precise ob­ servation, which would mean a reduction of time for Latin and Greek; or the medical faculties could be opened to grad­ uates of the first-class Realschulen, which would mean that some physicians would not know Greek while others would continue to receive the supposedly inadequate training of the Gymnasium. Among the critics cited, the choice between these options depended on whether one considered the Gymna­ sium's monopoly or its overwhelmingly classical curriculum more worth saving. Sybel and Helmholtz favored Gymnasium reform, the liberal Virchow favored equal access for Realschule graduates; DuBois-Reymond said he would support the opening of the medical faculties if the necessary reform of the Gymnasium did not occur.1' During the 1870s and 1880s, however, most educational " Rudolf Virchow in COIR 1 (1873):719, and in SB, XIV:2, p. 689 (13 December 1880); Emil DuBois-Reymond, Redeti (z vols.; zd ed.; Leipzig, 191Z), 1 :609-614; Karl Vogt in COIR ζ (1874):368. " Heinrich von Sybel, Die deutsche Universitdten (Bonn, 1874), pp. ji —

5Z· ljIbid.,

pp. 46-47; Helmholtz, Vortrdge, z:zn; Virchow in COIR 1 Dubois-Reymond, Reden, 1 :609—610.

(1873):719;

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" conservatives denied that a choice had to be made between preserving the Gymnasium's curriculum and its near monop­ oly over preparation for the universities. Not even all scientists shared Virchow's and Helmholtz's criticisms of the Gymna­ sium. One of the more important was Theodor Billroth, pro­ fessor of medicine in Vienna but a product of north German schools, who wrote in 1876: "It would seem unnecessary to waste words in defense of the intellectual, disciplinary value of the study of the Latin and Greek languages, or of the pedagogic importance of the classical historians of antiquity and the classic poets. A like degree of elasticity of thought can be attained by no other method of preparation, nor is there any other subject matter so well suited to fill the minds of boys and young men with exalted ideals and beautiful concepts as the history and literature of the ancient world."1·» As did Billroth, most conservatives continued to defend both the formal-logical and the moral-aesthetic value of classical studies. Even the mildly critical Helmholtz spoke in a single breath of the "extraordinarily fine artistic and logical train­ ing" given by Latin and Greek; Eduard Zeller, professor of philosophy at the University of Berlin, did the same. Wilhelm Schrader, for many years a provincial school inspector and then curator of the University of Halle, believed that instruc­ tion in the ancient languages "acted on the understanding and fantasy through its formal powers and on the personality through the content of its literature." According to Ludwig Windhorst, leader of the Catholic Center party, "a properly organized Gymnasium with a sound curriculum" would al­ ways provide the needed background for later study of the natural sciences, although how he could be so sure of this defies explanation.1' In any case, the continued strength of this traditional belief in the unique value of classical Bildung 14 Theodor Billroth, The Medical Sciences in the German Universities (New York, 1924), p. 100. »' Helmholtz, Vortrage, 1:172; Eduard Zeller, "Gymnasium und Universitat," Deutsche Rundschau 62 (1890):226-228; Wilhelm Schrader, Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre fur Gymnasien und Realschulen (2d ed.; Berlin, !"73), P- 331; Ludwig Windhorst in SB, XVI:2, p. 1,257 (13 May 1887).

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" served as a major obstacle to any secondary school reform that would meet the demands of the science professors. Defenders of the status quo also responded to the increased threat that Realschule graduates might invade the medical faculties by stressing the importance of maintaining a common educational basis for all university students. Many academics felt a genuine uneasiness about the rapidly proliferating spe­ cialization of disciplines in the late nineteenth century; they believed that only if all students shared a common secondary education could the unity of all scholarship, the universitas litteratum, survive. Some defenders of the Gymnasium's priv­ ileged position also emphasized the need to preserve a com­ mon spirit among the Gebildeten in a wider sense, that is, the civil servants and professionals who gave moral leadership to the nation.16 These were certainly legitimate concerns, but they also revealed, at least to a degree, an interest on the part of the Gebildeten in protecting their status against the indus­ trial and commercial classes who predominated in the semiclassical schools.17 Falk and Bonitz at the Prussian Ministry of Education lent more sympathetic ears to the criticisms of the Gymnasium by scholars such as Virchow and DuBois-Reymond that they did to the petitions from the towns and the Realschulmanner; given Bonitz's views, their choice in favor of Gymnasium re­ form rather than opening the medical faculties was no sur­ prise. In 1878, Falk's representative on the commission re­ viewing medical certification declared that the Prussian 16 Ferdinand Hornemann, "Die Zukunft unserer hoheren Schulen," Schriften des Deutschen Einheitsschulvereins 2 (1887):8-10; Gustav Korting, Neuphilologische Essays (Heilbronn, 1887), p. 119; Zeller, "Gymnasium und Universitat," p. 236; Alfred Hegar, Spezialismus und allgemeine Bildung (Freiburg i. B. and Tubingen, 1882), passim; Kirchhoff, Rede, p. 13; Karl Hillebrand, "Halbbildung und Gymnasialreform," DR 18 (1879):440. On the uneasiness about specialization, see also Russell McCormach, "On Ac­ ademic Scientists in Wilhelmian Germany," Daedalus 103 (1974):162-163. 17 This view of the essentially negative reaction of many Gebildeten to the emerging industrial world in which their status was threatened is the basic premise of Fritz Ringer's Decline of the German Mandarins.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" authorities believed that opening medical studies to Realschule graduates at that time would be premature, but added that Falk did plan to introduce the changes in the Gymnasium's curriculum that the science professors were demanding.18 De­ spite two changes that would occur at the head of the Ministry of Education in the next three years, Bonitz's continued tenure in the department of secondary education insured that this policy would be carried out. When Gustav von Gossler finally issued new curricula for all the secondary schools in i88z, the Gymnasium suffered a reduction from eighty-six to sev­ enty-seven credit hours of Latin; Greek was delayed from the third to the fourth year and dropped from forty-two to forty hours. The total time for mathematics rose two hours, for natural sciences and French, four hours each.2» Although the commission had incorporated the Prussian position into its preliminary report, Falk wanted further sup­ port in his rejection of the demands of the Realschulmanner. He asked Dr. Eduard Graf, the head of the German Physicians' Association, to poll local medical groups for the members' reactions to this report; Falk himself raised the point that the final decision on the admission of Realschule graduates would affect not only academic training, but also the social status of the medical profession. Of the 163 local associations that responded, only three voted for an immediate opening of the medical schools, three for an eventual relaxation of entrance requirements, and seven for opening if other faculties did the same, so that the prestige of medicine would not suffer. Fiftytwo opposed opening even if there was to be no reform of the Gymnasium, but ninety-eight agreed with Falk's planned reforms. Thus 111 of 163 groups admitted in one way or another that the existing Gymnasium did not fill the needs of future medical students; that only three recommended trans­ ferring the preparatory function in part to the semiclassical schools shows how powerful a role tradition and status played 18 Schmeding, 19

Entwicklung des realistischen hoheren Schulwesens, p. 92. Centralblatt, 1882, pp. 234-236, 244.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" in the minds of German physicians. The majority preferred that their future colleagues spend time at the university learn­ ing material taught in the first-class Realschulen rather than abandon the Gymnasium and become second-class Gebildeten, especially in comparison with lawyers; yet they did not show a strong desire to keep the Gymnasium as it was.'0 Neither the interests of the educational conservatives nor those of the medical professors were of primary importance to the practicing physicians in this question; maintaining their rel­ ative status was, and when the new regulations for medical studies were issued in 1883, they still included an Abitur from a Gymnasium as a prerequisite. Falk and his successors, however, did not use this slight modernization of the Gymnasium as an occasion for attempt­ ing to eliminate the first-class Realschule, or even to withdraw the right it conferred to study modern languages. The draft of Falk's comprehensive education law, completed in 1877 but never published because of the realignment of the parties brought on by Bismarck in the late 1870s, had seemed to echo Bonitz in talking about a purely modern secondary school; yet it had also spoken of the possible inclusion of sufficient Latin to provide an adequate preparation for the study of modern languages, which, given the complaints by language professors, would indicate a healthy increase over the level established in 1859. In April 1879, when hopes for the com­ prehensive law were dead, Falk outlined such a plan for in­ creased study of Latin to the Ministry of State, adding that the question of opening the medical faculties would be "ripe for discussion only after several years."31 As with the changes Falk to Graf, n January 1879, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 Va, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. iz, vol. Ill; Paul Wossidlo, Die Gutachten der deutschen AerzteVereine (n.p., 1880), pp. 10-11. For the general interest of the German medical profession in maintaining its social status, see Claudia Huerkamp, "Aerzte und Professionalisierung in Deutschland im neunzehnten Jahrhundert," Geschichte und Gesellschaft 6 (1980):609-630. 31 Erich Foerster, Adalbert Falk (Gotha, 1917), p. 3 50; Falk to the Ministry of State in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. iz, vol. III. Falk also told the other ministers that he was not going to be bullied by the

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" in the Gymnasium, this plan survived the personnel changes of the next three years: the curriculum for the semiclassical school issued by Gossler in 1882 brought a 23 percent increase in Latin to fifty-four credit hours, while the sciences, mathe­ matics, German, and drawing each lost several hours. To elim­ inate the confusion surrounding first- and second-class Realschulen, and presumably also as a sop to the Realschulmanner whose hopes for expanded privileges were being frustrated, the increase in Latin brought with it the long-coveted name of "Realgymnasium."3* One can only speculate on the reason for this treatment of the semiclassical schools. SinceJanuary 1877, the cadet acad­ emies had been organized along the lines of the first-class Realschulen, which might have given the Ministry of Edu­ cation second thoughts about trying to eliminate them. These schools had also proven themselves popular with a significant segment of the population that, if its later actions in 1891 can be taken as a guide, would have resisted their destruction vigorously.33 The Realschulen were a valuable source of stu­ dents for the technical institutes as well, and, as the increased Latin to meet the demands of the language professors suggests, may have been seen as still necessary as a supplier of future teachers for the modern schools. The Realschulmanner were not mollified by the empty vic­ tory embodied in the change of name; most believed that more Latin should have meant an immediate opening of the medical faculties. Professors of science and medicine were not pleased Realschulmanner. Wilhelm Lexis suggests that some officials in the Ministry of Education, perhaps even Bonitz, argued for opening the medical faculties at this time: Reform des hoheren Schulwesens, p. 87. >' Centralblatt, 1882, pp. 237, 258. After the final decision on medical studies in 1883, Edwin von Manteuffel, the Governor-General of AlsaceLorraine, abolished the few Realgymnasien there, which appears as an unusal policy in conjunction with the strengthened Latin at the Prussian Realgymnasium; perhaps the Reich authorities wanted to try a small-scale experiment to see if the Gymnasium could be a comprehensive school. » Centralblatt, 1878, p. 668; for the reaction of the defenders of the Realgymnasium in 1891, see chapter 7, p. 22.8 of this book.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" by the changes in the Gymnasium, either: even before the new curriculum had had a chance to affect the quality of the Gym­ nasium graduates entering the universities, a new series of complaints about their poor training emerged in the mid1880s. Among the new critics were Germany's leading Dar­ winist, Ernst Haeckel; Wilhelm von Esmarsch, a well-known surgeon; and Wilhelm von Bezold, director of the Royal Prus­ sian Meteorological Institute." The rapprochement between the Gymnasium and the Realgymnasium brought about by the new curricula of 1882—the first three grades were now virtually identical—encouraged a growing minority of conservatives to argue that the Gymna­ sium should pay a few more dues to the changing times. If it could increase the time devoted to science and modern lan­ guages sufficiently, it could become again a viable compre­ hensive school (Einheitsschule)" that would make the Realgymnasium unnecessary and thus preserve the common educational background for all Gebtldeten. Most advocates of a comprehensive school went further then Helmholtz or Sybel had in consciously choosing the cultural over the formal aspect of classical Bildung: they were willing to sacrifice some grammatical and written work in Latin in order to save the readings in Greek literature.'6 An Association for a Compre­ hensive School was founded in 1886; its prospectus set forth

Μ Ernst Haeckel, "Real-Gymnasien und Formal-Gymnasien," Zt. fur mathematischen undnaturwtssenschaftlicben Unterrtchts 17 (1887):547; remarks by professors Esmarsch, Bezold, and Puschmann in PA 28 (1886):133-136, 473-478, 612-617; Adolf Fick, Gesammelte Schrtften (4 vols.; Wurzburg, 1906), 4:106-112. » In Germany today the term Emheitsschule is used to describe a common foundation for all schools from age six through age thirteen or fourteen, but in the late nineteenth century it most often referred to a meshing of the Gymnasium and Realgymnasium into a comprehensive secondary school that was essentially a slightly modernized Gymnasium. >' Week, Das deutsche Gymnasium, pp. 41, 50; Hartmann, Zur Reform, pp. 51-52; Reisacker, Gymnasium und Realschule, pp. 25-26; Hornemann, "Die Zukunft," pp. 87-88; Johannes Flach, Die Einheitsschule der Zukunft (Leipzig, 1887), pp. 26-30.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" clearly its motivations and goals: "The unity of our national spirit rests to a large degree on the unity of our higher edu­ cation. A single secondary school, therefore, must be recreated in place of the Gymnasium and Realgymnasium. . . . The current status of our national culture demands such a reform, a demand to which our school system can never close itself. Economic considerations also point in the same direction: the fact that presently too many youths face the question of Gym­ nasium or Realgymnasium, that is, of their career choice, too early in life."37 This Association for a Comprehensive School attracted several hundred members, but lacking an existing constituency, it never approached the size or influence of the Realschulmanner. The Association did attract many of the leading pedagogical reformers in the late 1880s, but for those Germans less convinced of the value of new teaching methods, the comprehensive school promised even worse overburdening of pupils than the Gymnasium was being accused of at that time.38 If advocates of a comprehensive school thought that the reforms of 1882 had not gone far enough to adapt the schools to the "demands of the present," a few influential voices as­ serted that they had gone too far, that the Gymnasium had abandoned Bildung for practical training. This conservative critique of the classical schools had actually been voiced as early as 1872 by Friedrich Nietzsche. In a series of lectures "On the Future of Our Educational Institutions," not pub­ lished during his lifetime, Nietzsche had advanced many of the criticisms of the Gymnasium made by the reformers, not­ ing how "for today's Gymnasium pupils the Hellenes as Hel­ lenes are dead," and that even "for the majority of the phil" Monatsblatt des Liberalen Schulvereins 4 (1886):119. Several scholars have confused this Association for a Comprehensive School, founded in 1886, with Friedrich Lange's School Reform Association,founded in 1889: seeFiihr, "Die preussischen Schulkonferenzen," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik in Preussen, p. 195, and Sebastian Miiller, "Mittelstandische Schulpolitik," in Herrmann, ed., Historische Padagogik, p. 80. >' See chapter 4 for a discussion of the concern with overburdening.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" ologists themselves the study of antiquity appears quite sterile." He did not conclude, however, that the time had arrived to abandon the classics, but argued instead that the decline of the Gymnasium had occurred precisely because of efforts to keep the old schools "in tune with the times." At this early stage of his career already a confirmed cultural aristocrat, he objected vigorously to what he saw as the modern tendencies to extend Bildung to ever wider segments of the population and to dilute it with practical courses; in Nietzsche's view, "The number of true Gebildeten is and can only be unbeliev­ ably small." As had Humboldt, Nietzsche distinguished sharply between "institutions of Bildung and institutions devoted to the practical necessities of life"; he believed that even a Gym­ nasium education that "has in view at its completion a bu­ reaucratic position or other job is not education for Bildung." He called for a "true renewal and purification of the Gym­ nasium" that would make the classical schools "appear at once old and new." Only such a restoration of an aristocratic Bildung, free from the superficiality of modern education, would allow Germany to regain the level of culture it had known in Goethe's day." In the 1870s, Nietzsche's little-known remarks had less in­ fluence than the similar notions expressed in the writings of the expatriate essayist Karl Hillebrand and of Paul de Lagarde. Hillebrand warned often of the great danger of Halbbildung, which he saw as the source of "the inward disharmony which is felt in that very portion of the nation which, properly speak­ ing, ought to be the nursery of our national culture." Although he never defined his terms precisely, Hillebrand apparently shared Nietzsche's concern with a growing dilettantism in artistic and intellectual matters and with the tendency to con­ fuse "mere factual knowledge" with Bildung, which he thought could never be attained through schooling designed to meet »» Friedrich Nietzsche, "Ueber die Zukunft unserer Bildungsanstalten," in his Werke, part 3, vol. z, edited by Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinori (Berlin and London, 1973), pp. 179, 19J, 137, 139, 157, 209, 207, 183,

177·

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" "the needs of the time."40 Lagarde also believed that "de­ mocracy and Bildung are mutually exclusive," and argued that it was necessary "to make Gymnasien into Gymnasien again."41 In the wake of the new regulations of 1882, Heinrich von Treitschke carried such sentiments to a wider audience through an article in the influential Preussische Jahrbiicher, which he edited. Convinced that "only in epochs of spiritual decay, materialism, and moral uncertainty does civilization . . . de­ mand the accumulation of all sorts of facts instead of a sys­ tematic, formal education," Treitschke lamented the neglect of the dictum he said had originally guided instruction in the Gymnasium: iiNort multa, sed multum." Although he admit­ ted that scientific specialization was necessary, Treitschke wanted it restricted to the universities; in the secondary schools, he preferred concentration on the classics, German, and math­ ematics, with less time even for history. With Nietzsche and Lagarde, he insisted that Bildung could belong only to the few; as he said in his lectures on politics, "Millions must plow and forge and dig in order that a few thousands may write and paint and study."41 Trying to shape reality according to their will, these con­ servative critics of the Gymnasium conveniently ignored the fact, so obvious to responsible administrators such as Muhler, Falk, and Gossler, that the classical schools did not exist in See Robert Bosse, "Ennnerungen," Die Grenzboten 63 (1904):159; Friednch Paulsen, Ferdinand Tonntes—Frtedrtch Paulsen: Brtefwechsel i8j61908, ed. Olaf Klose et al. (Kiel, 1961), p. 29. '•» Otto von Bismarck, DiegesammelteWerke, ed. Hermann von Petersdorff et al. (15 vols.; Berlin, 1923-1933), 11:447.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" Bismarck's interpretation of Russian nihilism was shared by the Russian authorities at the time, as well as by some of the radical leaders, but recent research has failed to discern any specific factor, including unemployment, that distin­ guished the nihilists from the main body of university stu­ dents.85 In Germany, evidence that the academic proletariat turned to socialism is difficult to discover. Although some young writers and journalists who might be counted among the "hunger candidates" in the late 1880s did flirt with the Social Democrats, historians have generally suggested that the intense competition for positions in the civil service and the professions contributed more to the spread of anti-Semitism than of socialism in these years.86 This was apparently also the case in France, where Gustave LeBon and others expressed fears about the rise of nihilism among unemployed graduates that echoed Bismarck's comments.87 If the fears about the dangers posed by the academic pro­ letariat had little basis in reality, does this mean that they were not real, but served as a cover for other interests? An un­ ambiguous answer is not possible. The anarchist violence that occurred throughout Europe in the late nineteenth century certainly sufficed to produce fear in many quarters; the rising vote for the German Social Democrats despite the Anti-SoDaniel R. Brower, Tratmng the Nihilists (Ithaca and London, 1975), esp. pp. 106, HI, 141. Brower does note that once graduates found steady employment they seldom reappeared among the ranks of the radicals. 86 Vernon Lidtke, "Naturalism and Socialism in Germany," American His­ torical Review 79 (1974):14-22; Paul W. Massing, Rehearsal for Destruction (New York, 1967), pp. 75-76. Lidtke does not suggest that the naturahst writers turned to radicalism because they had failed to find employment; Massing does not provide concrete examples or references. 87 Gustave LeBon, Psychologte des Foules (13th ed.; Pans, 1907), pp. 8082; idem, Psychology of Socialism (New York, 1899), pp. 150-152, 369372; Robert F. Byrnes, Antisemitism tn Modem France (New Brunswick, N.J., 1950), pp. 269-270. The fears about an academic proletariat arose in France more in the 1890s than in the 1880s because of the later growth in university enrollment there and the wave of terrorist bombings in the early 1890s; for a general survey of conditions, see Henry Berenger, Les proletaires intellectuelles en France (Pans, n.d.).

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" cialist Laws of 1878 also spurred the kind of anxiety that made Eugen Richter's Pictures of the Socialist Future, Freely Adapted from Bebel a best seller in the early 1890s. Bismarck himself was definitely interested in fighting the spread of so­ cialism. Yet some of the Chancellor's less public comments about the academic proletariat indicate that he wanted to use this issue as a means to block social mobility. In a letter to Gossler on 31 May 1885, Bismarck cited Russian nihilism as "an instructive example of the pathological consequences of educating people beyond their needs"; he castigated "the un­ restricted multiplication of secondary schools" in Germany, which he said had produced a steadily increasing number of pupils "convinced that they are too good for the work their parents did simply because they have learned more." In Jan­ uary 1886, Bismarck again communicated to Gossler his belief that there were too many secondary schools, a situation that had led young men from "ever wider social circles" to press into the lower level of the civil service.88 Bismarck thus did not share Gossler's view that the way to reduce Gymnasium enrollments was by opening the lower civil service to graduates of higher Biirgerschulen; he wanted to drive the "ballast" out of secondary education entirely. No major efforts to restrict secondary or university enroll­ ments were made in the late 1880s. Gossler certainly did not try to persuade communities to close their Gymnasien or con­ vert them to higher Biirgerschulen, although government ex­ penditure on secondary education did decline as a percentage "8 Bismarck to Gossler, 31 May 1885, in Bismarck, Werke, 6c:314—315; Rottenburg to Gossler, 1 j January 1886, in ZStA-11, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 129, vol. II. According to one report, Bismarck at this time proposed separating the one-year-volunteer privilege from the right to become a reserve officer, granting the former after five years of secondary school but the latter only at graduation; I found no evidence of this plan being consid­ ered: COIR 14 (1886):86. Bismarck believed at this time that Gossler was doing a poor job as Minister of Education: see the diary entry for 10 January 1886 in Norman Rich and Μ. H. Fischer, eds., Dtegebetmen PaptereFrtedrtch von Holstetns, German edition by Werner Frauendienst (4 vols.; Gottingen, 1957), 2-:301-

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" of the budget in the late 1880s and early 1890s. In contrast to more recent events in West Germany, the government did not attempt to impose a numerus clausus on any of the uni­ versity faculties; all young men who had survived the rigors of the Gymnasium to earn an Abitur still had the right to study any field they wished. By reducing the number of sti­ pends, however, the Prussian authorities tried to discourage less affluent graduates from continuing their studies.89 This policy combined some humanitarianism with an interest in socially homogeneous professions: Gossler and his subordi­ nates had to deal with the unemployed and underemployed teachers, and knew that anyone who could not afford to pay for his university studies would suffer severe financial hardship during the five- or six-year wait for a full-time position. If the Ministry of Education and the other Prussian au­ thorities did not develop a positive program for dealing with the academic proletariat, they did know what should not be done: Realgymnasium graduates should not be allowed to swamp the universities. Conrad had concluded from his work, "It would be to go with open eyes against the sound course of historical development, if, when the universities are crowded to overflowing, we were to open new channels into them, or were to lower the standard of the demands made upon our students."90 Such considerations governed Gossler's policy throughout the 1880s: on 7 March 1888, for example, he responded to a claim by the Progressive deputy Langerhans that the time had come to expand the privileges of Realgym8> Miiller et al., "Modellentwicklung," in Herrmann, ed., Historische Padagogik, p. 52; Herrlitz and Titze, "Ueberfullung," p. 359. Ringer argues that the decline in the percentage of students from academic backgrounds and the rise from commercial and industrial backgrounds slowed dramatically between 1889 and 1911 compared to the rate between i860 and 1885, but that the percentage whose fathers were lower officials or lower teachers rose from 20 to 27 percent: Education and Society, p. 92. Jarausch points to a decline in students from the "Mittelstand" around 1890, but a renewed growth up until World War I: "Frequenz und Struktur," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik in Preussen, pp. 139-141. »° Conrad, German Universities, p. 225.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" nasium graduates by flatly declining to accept the responsi­ bility for "opening the floodgates" to the universities when there was already a surplus of graduates.91 The overcrowding of the professions thus put the Realschulmanner in an extremely awkward position; only after several years did they develop a coherent response to Conrad's and Gossler's arguments. Stimulated in part by an essay con­ test that the Realschulmanner sponsored, a number of pam­ phlets appeared in the late 1880s that argued that opening the floodgates was precisely the means to ease the flood, be­ cause the Gymnasium's monopoly over preparation for the universities had itself been the major cause of the overcrowd­ ing of the professions. Essentially, this position echoed Goss­ ler's own failed policy for luring the "ballast" to the modern schools, except that privileges granted Realgymnasium grad­ uates would have to be much broader than he had proposed for the Oberrealschule graduates. If Realgymnasium graduates won the right to study in all faculties, these pamphlets sug­ gested, many localities would convert their Gymnasien into semiclassical schools. The total number of young men with nine years of secondary education would not change signifi­ cantly, but fewer would be Gymnasium graduates so preju­ diced against practical careers that they had no acceptable alternative but to continue their studies at the university.92 Ernst Bernhardi pointed out that the failure to win the right to medical studies in the early 1880s had led ten towns to convert Realgymnasien into Gymnasien, exacerbating rather than easing the problem Gossler wanted to solve; even with the expansion of the six-year modern schools, the Gymnasium " SB, XVI:3, pp. 907-909 (7 March 1888). 51 Quintin Steinbart, "Des Herrn Ministers von Gossler letztes Bedenken gegen die Erweiterung der Berechtigungen der Realgymnasien," Mitteilungen des A. D. Realschulmannerveretns, no. 13 (1888); Otto Perthes, Die Mitschuld unseres hoberen Scbulwesens an der Ueberfullung in den gelehrten Standen (Gotha, 1889); Horst Keferstein, Die Ueberfullung der hoheren Be­ rufsarten (Hamburg, 1889); Friednch Pietzker and J. P. Treutlein, Der Zudrang zu den gelehrten Berufsarten, seme Ursachen und etwatgen Heilmittel (Braunschweig, 1889).

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" increased its percentage of the secondary enrollments during the 1880s after having this figure decline in the 1860s and 1870s.93 Yet the experience with graduates of the semiclassical schools who had poured into the study of modern languages and sciences after Miihler's decree in 1870 seemed to contradict these arguments that opening the floodgates would ease the flood. Quintin Steinbart attempted to minimize the impor­ tance of this example, which he saw as "Minister von Gossler's final scruple against expanding the privileges of Realgymnasium graduates," by pointing out how short-lived this surge of students had been. Whereas 347 out of 745 Realgymnasium graduates had entered the universities in 1881, with 208 of them taking teacher certification examinations in 1885, in 1886-1887 only 175 of 542 such graduates had entered the universities, with probably only about 100 of them aiming at the teachers' examinations. Opening all faculties at once would ease any temporary dislocations, Steinbart continued, adding that the result would not be more physicians than Germany needed, but ones who knew more science.94 At no time, how­ ever, did Gossler demonstrate any willingness to consider the merits of the Realschulmanner's view of opening the flood­ gates. Compared to the demands that graduates entering scientific, medical, and technical studies receive a more appropriate training than the classical Gymnasium provided, or to the similar demand that dropouts be better prepared for the jobs they entered, the overcrowding of the professions in the 1880s appears to a certain extent as a spurious issue with regard to the "demands of the present" on the educational system. Yet, as with the "ballast," the academic proletariat reflected per­ haps the most important demand—for increased access to secondary and higher education. Although the economic in»' Bernhardt, in unpaginated reprint from Stahl und Eisen, 10 (April 1889); Ringer, Education and Society, p. 272. Μ Steinbart, "Des Herrn Ministers von Gossler letztes Bedenken," pp. 3— 4. 7·

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" stability of the so-called Great Depression which lasted from 1873 to 1896 an^ t^e antipractical ideology of the Gymnasien aggravated the problem of the overcrowded professions, the roots of this phenomenon actually lay deeper: if a significantly larger percentage of the population was going to attend sec­ ondary schools and universities, such education would have to become a pathway into more different careers than it had been in the nineteenth century. In other words, more Gym­ nasium and university graduates would have to enter the world of business and industry; that only 73 percent of Gymnasium graduates went on to the universities in the 1890s suggests that this change was occurring of necessity in these years. Yet Gossler's statement in 1885 that those whose useful activities would not be in the "so-called scholarly classes" should not attend the classical or semiclassical schools indicates that awareness of the possibility of using the Gymnasium as a preparation for nonacademic careers had not advanced far at this time. THE DIRECT ASSAULT ON THE GYMNASIUM

The combination of the various demands of the present on the secondary schools with the apparent block to any reform presented by the overcrowding of the professions led a number of reformers in the mid- and late 1880s to propose more radical measures as means to break the impasse. Echoing the Engineers' Association's assertion that the Gymnasium did not meet the needs of a modern industrial society, some sup­ porters of the Realgymnasium went beyond the old demands for parity with the Gymnasium to call for the complete re­ placement of the classical by the semiclassical schools. Of supreme importance for this movement, because of its eru­ dition and the objectivity of its author, was Friedrich Paulsen's monumental History of Scholarly Instruction in the German Schools and Universities, published less than a year after Con­ rad's book had so seriously undermined hopes for expanding the privileges of Realgymnasium graduates. Paulsen, who him-

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" self had begun to study Latin only at age fifteen, had been convinced by his historical research that until the nineteenth century pupils had learned the ancient languages only as tools for obtaining other knowledge; the notion of a formal mental discipline to be derived from study of Greek and Latin had been the product of unique interests and enthusiasms in the period of Humboldt's reforms. Paulsen insisted that these en­ thusiasms had diminished markedly; although not hostile to the study of the classical languages, he examined their future role in German secondary education strictly in terms of their utility for university students. Predicting that the day would arrive when both languages would disappear from the re­ quired curriculum, he nonetheless believed that Latin would remain a necessary tool for a long time. This view made Paul­ sen a strong supporter of the Realgymnasium as the most appropriate structure for secondary education.9' Paulsen's suggestion that the time had arrived for obligatory Greek to be abandoned received a sympathetic hearing from individuals concerned about both inadequately prepared stu­ dents of science and medicine in the universities and members of the "ballast" who took jobs in commerce and industry. Some reformers argued simply that pupils could no longer expend the needed effort on mastering Greek when the times demanded that they learn more science, modern languages, and—often mentioned in the late 1880s—economics.96 Others questioned the cultural as well as the formal value of classical Bildung, insisting that the study of antiquity was not merely a waste of time, but harmful; as one critic put it, "The classical world differs so completely from the modern that 'living' in « Friedrich Paulsen, Geschichte des gelebrten Unterriehts aufdett deutsehen Sehulen und Universitaten (ist ed.; Leipzig, 1885); idem, An Autobiography, trans, and ed. Theodor Lorenz (New York, 1938), p. 119. Paulsen was an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Berlin; on the origins of his study, see ibid., pp. 252-253, 280-282, 312-313. »' See, for examples, Ε. Falch, Gedanken iiber eine Reform unseres Mittelschulwesens (Wurbzurg, 1888), pp. 1-5; and Theodor Schonborn, Das hdhere Unterrichtswesen in der Gegenwart (Berlin, 1885), p. 20.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" the former makes comprehension of the latter more difficult." In science, politics, ethics, and aesthetics, ancient models no longer applied; spending years immersed in them would hinder a boy's adjustment to the contemporary world when he left school. An anonymous Gymnasium director also pointed out that the historical investigation of ancient Greece during the nineteenth century had destroyed the ideal image of Greek culture that was taught in the schools; the darker sides of life in antiquity were hardly appropriate subjects for the edifica­ tion of young minds.97 Thus for these radical reformers, clas­ sical Bildung was far from being a preparation for all careers; at best, it gave preliminary training to future philologists. Those who urged abandonment of the concentration on the ancient languages did not agree on what should replace them. In the late 1880s, a few German scientists argued for a sec­ ondary education that emphasized the natural sciences, but even these men often adopted the rhetoric of "humanism," "formal mental discipline," and iiBildung" associated with the defense of the classics.98 Most of the vocal opponents of the Gymnasium did not share this outlook, however, agreeing more with the position expressed by Friedrich Paulsen in a major address to the Realschulmanner's convention in 1889. On that occasion, Paulsen insisted that the study of religion, history, German, modern languages, and Latin in the Realgymnasium sufficed to make it the home of a modern hu­ manistic Bildung that could meet the needs of German society in the 1890s and beyond." 97 Fnednch Schmeding, Dte klasstsche BtIdung tn der Gegenwart (Berlin, 1885), pp. 37, 59, 75, 148; Arnold Ohlert, Dte deutsche Schule und das klasstsche Altertum (Hannover, 1891), pp. 78-88, 101, 150; Alethagoras, Unser Gymnastal-Unterrtcht (Braunschweig, 1889), pp. 36-38. »8 Ernst Mach, Popular-wtssenschaftltche Vorlesungen (3d ed.; Leipzig, 1903), pp. 313-333; Haeckel, "Real-Gymnasien," pp. 546-550; S. Gunther, "Ueber den Bildungswert der mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Facher," PA 32 (1890):354-372; Alois Hofler, "Die humanistischen Aufgaben des physikalischen Unternchts," Zt. fur den phystkaltschen und chemtschen Unterrtcht 2 (1888):1. »» Fnednch Paulsen, Gesammelte padagogtsche Abhandlungen, ed. Eduard Spranger (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1912); pp. 1-63.

(no)

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" This growing attack on the Gymnasium did not produce another lobbying organization, although it obviously had strong appeal for elements of the Realschulmanner and the Engineers' Association. Interestingly, it did not make major inroads among the directors and teachers of the modern schools. Gustav Holzmiiller, director of the higher Biirgerschule in Hagen, founded a journal and then an organization "for the furthering of Latin-less secondary schools," but rather than attacking of­ ficial policy, Holzmuller and his colleagues came to Gossler's support. Holzmuller regarded the common foundation for all secondary schools as impossible to carry out in practice, re­ jected the Realschulmanner's views on the best way to ease the overcrowding of the professions, and backed Gossler's view that what the country needed was more six-year modern schools.100 The more radical attacks on the Gymnasium probably did more to help the conservatives' cause than to hasten the proc­ ess of change: proposals for drastic changes in schools that one friend of the Gymnasium called "a blessing for the nation, a model for other countries," made it easier to defend the status quo. Writing his memoirs in the 1920s, the famous classicist Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff recalled, "The dislike of Greek was to be found in the half-educated of the upper classes, who had learned nothing at school and thought themselves superior in their lack of culture . . . and in the well-fed bourgeois who only think of earning money and whose god is their belly."101 Many teachers and professors displayed a sharp hostility to the interference of "laymen" and "dilet­ tantes" in educational affairs; as Adolf Matthias once noted with chagrin, "In school matters today, the opinion appears to predominate that those with the least possible practical experience have the best judgment." Especially galling to many conservatives was the role of the press in the agitation for school reform: in the words of one Gymnasium director, "We have no lack of newspaper correspondents who have deter•°° Holzmflller, Kantpfum die Schulreform, pp. 9, 51-64. "" Ulrich von Wiiamowitz-Moeliendorff, My Recollections, trans. G. C. Richards (London, 1930), p. 304. (Ill)

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" mined with complete certainty that there is something rotten in the state of our schools."101 More unsettling to many defenders of the old order than this interference of laymen in educational affairs, however, was the work of Friedrich Paulsen, who came from the hu­ manistic side of the university and had expressed his views with such great moderation and massive documentation in his History of Scholarly Instruction. A long review of this book in the Preussische Jahrbiicher warned against allowing Paulsen's objectivity in the main body of the work to trap the reader into accepting his conclusions about the future role of the ancient languages; the Grenzboten even argued that the final chapter containing Paulsen's views on contemporary school reform should have been published separately.103 Paulsen be­ came something of a pariah at his own university; as he re­ ported in his memoirs, "Most of my colleagues were unani­ mous in their opinion that this book was a disgrace to a university professor, especially to a Berlin professor."104 EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR WOMEN?

If calls for the elimination of Greek from the Gymnasium appeared to threaten humanistic Bildung and the status of the Gebildeten, the emergence in the 1880s of demands for greater educational opportunities for young women posed an even more shocking challenge to traditional values. Although such demands did not have a great impact on the discussion of the proper secondary education for boys in these years, they formed an integral part of the growing discontent with the traditional educational system. Whereas the absence of the ancient Ian•" Adolf Matthias, Aus Schule, Unterrtcht und Erztebung (Munich, 1901), p. 17; Gustav Wendt, Die Gymnasten und dte offenthche Metnung (Karlsruhe, 1883), p. 4. ,OJ PJ61 (1888):470; Dte Grenzboten 44, no. 4 (1885):280; BfhS ζ (1885):77. "»« Paulsen, Autobiography, pp. 313-315, 346. See also Fritz Blattner, "Der Histonker Fnedrich Paulsen und seine Kntiker," Zt. fur Padagogtk 9 (1963):113-130.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" guages in the higher girls' schools had always been a mark of their inferiority to the Gymnasium, now the calls for improved educational opportunities could become calls for a greater valuation of modern Btldung, because almost no one wanted to impose Latin and Greek on young girls as the price of opening the universities to women. The first major appeal for improvements in the higher girls' schools came in 1872, when a group of teachers meeting in Weimar protested the fact that in Germany the higher girls' schools were administered with the elementary schools rather than the secondary schools for boys. This meant that the teachers held a lower rank in the civil service. Yet the male teachers who formed the majority at this meeting also declared that the education of young girls should not be placed pre­ dominantly in the hands of women.10' In 1873, Adalbert Falk held a conference to discuss girls' education just as he did for the boys' schools; a result of the conference was to confirm the monopoly of university-trained men over teaching in the upper grades. This conference also recommended adopting a ten-year course for the higher girls' schools, from age six to sixteen, distinguished from the lesser intermediate schools by the teaching of two modern foreign languages.106 Despite this increased official attention to girls' education, however, the higher girls' schools remained overwhelmingly under local control: even in the 1890s, when 272 of 568 secondary schools for boys were wholly or partly supported by the Prussian state, only 4 of 128 girls' schools were. In another contrast to the boys' schools, the Prussian authorities tolerated a significant number of private secondary schools for girls, run as private enterprises virtually free of state regulation.IO? "> Emmy Beckmann, Die Entwicklung der hoheren Madehenbildung in Deutsehland von 1870-1914 (Berlin, 1936), p. 6; Erich Dauzenroth, Kleine Gesehiehte der Madehenbildung (Ratingen, 1971), p. 153. IO< Beckmann, Madehenbildung, p. 16; Bolton, Secondary School System, p. 279. Only five of the twenty delegates at this conference were women. •°7 Russell, German Higher Schools, p. 119; Beckmann, Madehenbildung,

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" The fact that these private schools were staffed and directed almost entirely by women was a continuing sore point with the women teachers at the public schools; throughout the late 1870s and the 1880s, these teachers lobbied for the right to teach in the upper grades of the public schools and for op­ portunities to obtain the necessary training to do so. The men who ran the German Association for Higher Girls' Schools, however, put up an inflexible resistance.108 Hopes for reform increasingly centered on the approaching reign of Crown Prince Friedrich because his wife Victoria was known to have a strong interest in women's education; the news of his fatal illness in 1887 caused deep disappointment. This disappointment spurred six women in Victoria's circle to petition both Gossler and the House of Deputies to allow women a greater role in the upper grades of the girls' schools, especially in teaching Ger­ man and religion, and to provide facilities for training women to teach at this level.109 These petitions alone would have caused little controversy had they not been accompanied by a pamphlet written by one of the women, Helene Lange, a teacher at a private school in Berlin. In this work, known to history as the "Yellow Bro­ chure," Lange asserted bluntly, "Our schools neither provide Bildung nor educate temperate women of refined morals, they only teach." Lange claimed that male teachers trained in the universities, most of whom she believed taught at girls' schools only because they could not find jobs teaching boys, were overburdening their pupils with factual knowledge while fail­ ing to attend to moral education. In arguing for educational opportunities beyond the ten-year course, she even cited a p. 42. Of the permanent teachers in the private girls' schools in the 1890s, 2,487 were women, 112 were men: Bolton, Secondary School System, p. 301. 108 Dauzenroth, Madchenbtldung, p. 154; Helene Lange, Lebensermnerungen (Berlin, 1930), p. 128. •°» Lange, Lebenserinnerungen, pp. 140-148. For an expanded treatment of the roots of this petition, see my forthcoming article, "Could Separate Be Equal? Helene Lange and Women's Education in Imperial Germany," Htstory of Education Quarterly (1982).

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" comment by Gossler in which he admitted that it was im­ possible for a sixteen-year-old girl to have received a "truly completed Bildung." Lange was willing to leave instruction in science and grammar to men because of their "greater ca­ pacity for abstraction," but insisted women should teach the more ethically oriented subjects to girls. Yet at this time she did not want women to attend the universities where they would become scholars rather than teachers, but to go to separate institutions that would be essentially the existing teachers' seminars raised to a higher level.110 The reaction of the men teachers to the petition and pam­ phlet was predictably negative, for in this period of an over­ crowded teaching profession the fulfillment of Lange's de­ mands would pose a grave threat to their livelihood. Relations between male and female teachers at the girls' schools became so strained that the women formed their own organization in 1890.1" The Ministry of Education also responded negatively: Karl Schneider told Lange that he would not be able to sleep at night if he had written a pamphlet such as the Yellow Brochure. The ministry reportedly worked behind the scenes to prevent the petition from ever coming to the floor of the House of Deputies; the official response to it came only after a year's delay and rejected most of the points raised in Lange's pamphlet. But it did admit the desirability of giving some form of higher training to women teachers.112 Before this reply arrived late in 1888, Helene Lange had traveled to England and returned even more convinced of the backwardness of female education in Germany. In a report on her trip published in 1889, she brought the recent devel­ opments in the secondary and higher education of English women to the attention of the German public, stating flatly, "The English public girls' schools are preferable to the Ger110Helene

Lange, Kampfzeiten (2 vols.; Berlin, 1928), 1:14, 25-26, 30, 18, 32, 45, 51. The actual title of the "Yellow Brochure" was Die hdhere Madchenschule und ihre Bestimmung. Lange, Lebenserinnerungen, pp. 181-196; idem, Kampfzeiten, 1:3-4. 1,1 Ibid., 1:5-6, 58.

(US)

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" man." She repeated her belief that "those who intellectually hunger should be offered the best intellectual food available in Germany," but now also defended increased educational opportunities by pointing to the problem of what the English called "redundant women," those who had no husbands and needed to support themselves. Lange argued that women should have access to the medical profession as well as teaching, noting, "it is generally acknowledged that female physicians have become a necessity, owing to the phenomenal increase of female maladies."113 While in England, Lange visited Girton College, and contact with the ideas of Emily Davies apparently convinced her of the dangers of second-class citizenship inherent in separate educational institutions for women. "Though I personally be­ lieve that one might unhesitatingly use other roads than the customary ones without falling into the error of aiding Halbbildung," she wrote in 1889, "the men would not recognize any other Bildung as profound and sufficient enough, except one like their own and acquired like their own. This is a truth we must recognize in Germany." This new position created a dilemma for Lange because she shared many of the criticisms of the classical Gymnasium that the reformers were raising. "Certainly the formative value of the study of the classical languages is great," she explained, "but modern life demands too much to spend the best years in training our mental fac­ ulties with means which, in themselves, have nothing to do with the actualities of life, and, besides, cause an overbur­ dening which plays havoc with youth." She was thus "opposed to the ancient languages in girls' schools," preferring more science and mathematics to make them closer to the higher Burgerschulen for boys; yet she also supported "establishing Lange, Lebenserinnerungen, p. 161; idem, Higher Education of Women in Europe, trans. L. R. Klemm (New York, 1897), pp. 75, iz8, IZI, 132. Both the problem of "redundant women" and the need for female physicians had been mentioned only in passing in the "Yellow Brochure": Kampfzeiten, 1:46, 51. Corinne Schmidt in Theodor Fontane's Frau Jenny Treibel might be taken as typical of the unmarried young women Lange had in mind.

(Il6)

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" at least a certain number of classical schools for girls, so as to give those who intend to enter the university an opportunity to fit themselves for it." These schools would begin only at age fourteen, and thus rest on the higher girls' school as a common foundation extending through the equivalent of Obertertia in a boys' school."4 Several other new women's organizations petitioned for the opening of university studies to women in 1888-1889; there was also talk of founding a girls' Gymnasium."5 Yet what was founded, with Helene Lange's active participation, was not a classical course, but a so-called Realkurse for women, which opened in Berlin in October 1889 and attracted 2.14 pupils in the first year. The Realkurse offered to graduates of a higher girls' school two years of mathematics, science, Latin, history, economics, and modern languages, aiming at prepar­ ing them for commercial careers or for taking the examination for the Swiss equivalent of the Abitur, which would allow them to study at Swiss universities."6 Given Lange's views on classical education, one presumes that she and her colleagues in this venture hoped that soon an opening of the German universities to Realgymnasium graduates would make it easier for women who had been through this new course to enter German universities as well. In summary, what contemporaries called the demands of the present on the secondary schools had two general aspects: the desire for some form of secondary education by an in­ creasing percentage of the population, including women, and the need to include more modern subject matter for both the "ballast" who did not graduate from Gymnasien and Real"• Lange, Higher Education of Women, pp. 13-14, 100-104. Hugo Gaudig, "Das hohere Madchenschulwesen," in Paul Hinneberg, ed., Die Kultur der Gegenwart, part 1: Die allgemeinen Grundlagen der Kultur der Gegenwart (Berlin and Leipzig, 1906), p. 190; Vereinigung zur Veranstaltung von Gymnasialkurse fur Frauen, Geschichte der Gymnasialkurse fiir Frauen zu Berlin (Berlin, 1906), pp. 22-23. 116 Vereinigung, Gesehichte der Gymnasialkurse, pp. 7-20; Dauzenroth, Madchenbildung, pp. 158-159; Lange, Lebenserinnerungen, pp. 175-180.

"DEMANDS OF THE PRESENT" gymnasien and for at least some of those youths who went on to the universities. The many proposals for reform at times overlapped or conflicted; satisfying the needs of both the "bal­ last" and future students of science and medicine within the Gymnasium appeared likely to dilute the ancient languages so seriously that they would not survive. Luring the "ballast" to higher Biirgerschulen or allowing the Realgymnasien to prepare pupils for medical studies involved the extension of privileges to young men whose social and educational back­ grounds current professionals and civil servants did not believe qualified them for inclusion in the ranks of the Gebildeten; the same type of argument was used against allowing women to become physicians or upper-level teachers. Under Falk, Puttkamer, and Gossler, the Prussian Ministry of Education rejected a common foundation for all secondary schools as an improper way to deal with the "ballast"; it also refused to open the universities any further to Realgymnasium grad­ uates, at first because of doubts about the value of a semi­ classical education and concern for the status of physicians, later more because of the overcrowding of the professions. As long as these considerations continued to govern official pol­ icy, the tendency would be to make small adjustments in the Gymnasium curriculum rather than open the universities to Realgymnasium graduates, even if Gossler's rejection of a comprehensive school meant he would make no effort to abol­ ish the semiclassical schools. This dilution and diversification of the classical curriculum produced not only criticism from conservatives such as Lagarde and Treitschke, but also conflict with another vocal group of school reformers, those whom Helene Lange was echoing in her assertion that Gymnasium pupils were already dangerously overburdened with school work.

(ι 18)

FOUR

THE OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH What are the results of the present-day school? Exhausted brain power, weak nerves, limited originality, paralysed initi­ ative, dulled power of observing surrounding facts, idealism blunted under the feverish zeal of getting a position in the class. Ellen Key Nervousness is the characteristic feature of our time. Dr. Paul Hasse1

E

UROPEAN culture in the firt-de-siecle was obsessed by fears of decadence, degeneration, and nervousness. In the post-Darwinian world, where the notion of the sur­ vival of the fittest was applied indiscriminately to all areas of human interaction, many people worried that the haste, crowding, and unsanitary conditions of life in modern cities would produce future generations less able to compete in the struggle for existence. Englishmen and Frenchmen worried about declining birthrates that would lead to German domi­ nation of Europe, while the German Kaiser popularized the notion of the "Yellow Peril" about to swamp Europe from the East.2 Fictional works such as Henrik Ibsen's Ghosts and Emile Zola's saga of the Rougon-Macquart explored themes of hereditary disease and decline; Herbert Spencer inveighed against social welfare policies designed to aid the weaker mem-

' Ellen Key, The Century of the Child (New York, 1909), p. 275; Dr. Paul Hasse, "Schule und Nervositat," Die Gartenlaube ¢1881), p. 7. 1 On England, see G. R. Searle, The Quest for National Efficiency (Berkeley, 1971), pp. 60,95, 236; and Richard Soloway, "Neo-Malthusians, Eugenists, and the Declining Birthrate in England," Albion 10 (Fall 1978):164-286. For France, see esp. Claude Digeon, La crise allemande de la pensee franqaise (Paris, 1959). On the "Yellow Peril," see Heinz Gollwitzer, Die "gelbe Gefahr" (Gottingen, 1962).

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

bers of society at the expense of the stronger. Within the medical profession, widespread interest in mental illness and nervous disorders created the atmosphere in which Freud de­ veloped his theories.3 Throughout western Europe, no institution received more attention as being the major source of deteriorating national health than did the classical secondary schools. To a certain extent, the schools were blamed for, or asked to cure, prob­ lems stemming from changing life-styles in society at large; but many critics clearly did see grave dangers of "overstress," "overpressure," or "overburdening" in the combination of an excess of mental work with a neglect of physical exercise in the schools. In France, even before the powerful stimulus to fears of decline provided by the defeat of 1870, the poet Victor Laprade decried the "homicidal education" of the lycees and colleges, which he described as "a regimen entirely contrary to nature, which lowers the vital force and enervates the con­ stitution of both the individual and the race subjected to it for too long." Jules Simon made similar charges in 1874, and members of the Paris Academy of Medicine even debated the issue in 1887.4 The Scandinavian countries produced two of the first large-scale investigations of the health of secondary school pupils: Niels Hertel's studies in Copenhagen led to "truly a sad and startling result, quite enough to justify the complaints made about the health of our children": Axel Key concluded from his work in Sweden that "the question of the load in the lower grades of our secondary schools is of crucial importance for our young generation and thus for our na­ tion."' In England, concern with overpressure centered more ' For an interesting view of nervousness in the late nineteenth century, see Dr. Andreas Sterner, "Das nervose Zeitaker" (Zurich, 1964). 4Victor Laprade, L'education homicide (Pans, 1868), p. 30; Simon, Reforme 1ie I'ensetgnement, pp. 92-110; A. Bmet and V. Henri, La fatigue tntellectuelle (Paris, 1898), pp. 9-13; Edmond Demohns, A quoi tient la superiorite des Anglo-Saxons? (Paris, 1897), pp. 101-113. See also Anderson, Education m France, pp. 184-186. » N.T.A. Hertel, Overpressure tn High Schools in Denmark, trans. C. Godfrey Sorenson (London, 1885), p. 5; Axel Key, Schulhygienische Untersuchungen, ed. Leo Burgerstein (Hamburg, 1899), p. 179.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

on elementary than on secondary education, although the rig­ ors of the latter were often cited as a reason why young girls with their constitutional infirmities should refrain from com­ peting on an equal basis with boys. Yet even the English public schools, usually considered as the home of sport and fitness in the nineteenth century, came under attack in an early study of school hygiene that claimed, "If parents and teachers thought more of sound, healthy bodies, and less of encyclopaedic minds, we should have stronger intellects, finer characters, and less vice."6 The Russian Gymnasium also aroused complaints in the late nineteenth century about "the daily overload of ab­ stractions imposed on pupils, especially the younger ones."7 Nowhere, however, did warnings about the dangers posed by the overburdening of secondary school pupils have a longer, or louder, history than in Germany, where the institutional­ ization of the originally emancipatory ideal of Bildung in the classical schools had led very quickly to charges that boys were being seriously overworked. In 1836, just two years after a Gymnasium Abitur had become a prerequisite for matric­ ulation at the Prussian universities, Dr. C. S. Lorinser accused the classical schools of demanding too much of pupils in too many subjects, which meant that the goals of humanistic Bildung were not reached and "the body is subjected to an un­ natural constraint that hinders physical development." Many educators and physicians denied the accuracy of these charges, but King Friedrich Wilhelm III agreed with Lorinser and pres­ sured Minister of Education von Altenstein into adopting the less stringent requirements of the curriculum of 1837.8 Re* ' A. B. Robertson, "Children, Teachers and Society: The Overpressure Controversy, 1880-1886," Brtttsh Journal of Educational Studies 20 (1972):315-323; Francis Galton, "Remarks on replies by teachers to ques­ tions respecting mental fatigue," Journal of the Anthropological Institute 17 (1889):157-166; Joan N. Burstyn, "Education and Sex: The Medical Case Against Higher Education for Women in England, 1870-1900," Proceedings of the American Phtlosophtcal Society (April 1973), pp. 79-89; Clement Dukes, Health at School (new ed. enl.; London, 1887), p. 5. 7 Alston, Education and the State in Tsarist Russia, p. 140; Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, pp. 194, 200. 8 C. S. Lonnser, Zum Schutz der Gesundheit in den Schulen (reprint ed.,

(I2l)

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

newed complaints about overburdening arose briefly in the early 1850s and led to an official decree in which teachers were warned against assigning excessive amounts of home­ work, a warning that was repeated in response to new com­ plaints in 1875.» In extent and duration, however, the wide­ spread agitation about overburdened Gymnasium pupils that began around 1880 far surpassed all that had gone before. Although some of the evidence advanced to demonstrate the existence of overburdening was vague or faulty, the fears aroused by the apparent threat it posed to the national health were genuine: as one skeptic commented as early as 1883, "These complaints are already too general and too widespread to be calmed by the discovery of fallacies in them."10 The first blast of the trumpet in this new campaign was delivered by the National Liberal politician Johannes Miquel, who spoke to the Prussian House of Deputies in 1877 about the "excessive accumulation and expansion of material taught in the Gymnasium." Of greater influence was a speech by Dr. Paul Hasse at a convention of the directors of Germany's mental hospitals in 1880, which reached a wide audience through a summary published in the popular periodical, Die Gartenlaube. Hasse charged that in some cases he had treated, overburdening with school work had produced mental illness; in addition, he insisted that "the colossal sacrifice of effort and time" that a Gymnasium education demanded generated "for the most part quite superficial knowledge." Shortly after Hasse's address, Emil Hartwich, a district judge from Dusseldorf, gave another boost to the fears engendered by over­ burdening in a speech delivered to the founding meeting of the Central Association for Physical Fitness. Hartwich be­ moaned the complete dominance of intellectual over physical Berlin, 1861). On Lonnser's influence, see Wassil A. Manoff, Das Ueberburdungsproblem in den hoheren Schulen Deutschlands (Jena, 1899), pp. 32-37; and Dieter Sengling, Das Problem der Ueberforderung tm Ktndesund Jugendalter (Weinheim and Berlin, 1967), pp. 18-21. » Centralblatt, ι8γj, pp. 639-641. IO NJ 128 (1883):264.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

education in the schools; in his view, "eternal writing and reading" resulted in "anaemia, scrofula, consumption, and tuberculosis."" In the wake of these three assaults on the educational prac­ tice of the Gymnasium, pamphlets and articles discussing the "overburdening question" became so numerous that the Cath­ olic politician August Reichensperger remarked that keeping up with the literature could itself create overburdening.12 Sev­ eral "symptoms" of overburdening appeared most frequently in these works. Topping the list was the high percentage of one-year volunteers who were declared unfit for military serv­ ice when the time came for them to enlist, a percentage much higher than that for regular conscripts, which was itself dis­ turbingly high. Hartwich mistakenly claimed that over 80 percent of the volunteers were unfit; in fact, between 1877 and 1881, only 21,000 out of 47,000, or 45 percent, of the volunteers actually served their term of duty, compared to 62 percent of three-year conscripts.13 The critics assumed that these figures represented only the debilitating effects of long years spent in stuffy school rooms; no one asked if boys whose parents could afford to send them to a secondary school might not have easier access to physicians who could certify illnesses or infirmities that would free them from serving, as happened with Thomas Mann.14 Another proof adduced to show that Gymnasium pupils suffered physical damage as a result of their schooling was " SB, XIII:2, p. 580 (28 November 1877); Paul Hasse, Die Ueberburdung unserer Jugend (Braunschweig, 1880), p. 36; idem, "Schule und Nervositat"; Emil Hartwich, Woran wtr letden (Dusseldorf, 1882), p. 12. 11 SB, XV:i, p. 913 (26 February 1883). •» Hartwich, Woran wtr letden, p. 16; P. Hasemann, Die Ueberburdung der Schuler der hoheren Lehranstalten Deutscblands (id ed.; Strassburg, 1884), pp. 9-13. According to the Prussian government, 22 percent of the volunteers were totally unfit and 33 were partially or temporarily unfit and assigned to the untrained Ersatz-Reserve: see Centralblatt, 1888, p. 470. •« Thomas Mann, Brtefe, 1889-1936, ed. Enka Mann (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1961), pp. 94-95. This incident served as the model for Dietrich Hessling's evasion of military service in Heinnch Mann's Der Untertan.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

the high incidence of nearsightedness among them. The pi­ oneer in studying the vision of German school children was Dr. Hermann "Eyes" Cohn of Breslau, who in 1867 published the results of his examinations of over 10,000 pupils. Cohn found that whereas only 5 percent of children in rural ele­ mentary schools were nearsighted, 32 percent in Gymnasien were; in the secondary schools, the percentage rose from class to class, so that half of the Primaner needed glasses.1' Cohn attacked neither the amount nor the type of material studied in the schools; he wanted only to improve the physical con­ ditions under which boys did their studying, both at home and at school. In the more "nervous" atmosphere of the 1880s, however, others were not so circumspect: Hasse, for example, attributed the high incidence of nearsightedness to the "dam­ aging effect of overburdening on the brain," while another physician saw it as the result not of bad lighting and improper desks, but of school instruction itself. Complicating the dis­ cussion of this issue was a debate within the medical profes­ sion over whether nearsightedness should be considered a dis­ ease or merely a healthy adaptation by the eye to its conditions of use. In any case, the fact that even 25 percent of the oneyear volunteers who were fit for military service had poor vision sufficed for one university professor to label this "re­ sult" of overburdening "a national calamity."16 Dr. Hasse's charges about the role of the schools in pro­ ducing mental illness in its students found few supporters: when Minister of Education von Puttkamer asked the direc­ tors of Prussia's other mental hospitals if their experiences confirmed Hasse's assertions, most replied that this was not " Hermann Cohn, Untersucbungen der Augen 10,060 Schulkindem (Leip­ zig, 1867), p. 2.3, 34—35. See the portrait of "Augen Cohn" by his son, Emil Ludwig, in the latter's Gifts of Life, chapter 1. 16 Hasse, Ueberbiirdung, p. 49; Dr. von Zehender, Ueber den Einftuss des Schulunterrichts auf Entstehung von Kurzsiehtigkeit (Stuttgart, 1880), p. 8; Hubert Windegrath, Kurzsiehtigkeit und Sehule (Berlin, 1890); Hegar, Spezialismus und allgemeine Bildung, p. 19.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

the case.17 Yet many observers, both physicians and laymen, believed that overburdening sometimes caused the ultimate disorder, suicide. A study of suicide as a "mass phenomenon of modern civilization," published in 1881, argued that al­ though the suicide rate was rising in all civilized countries, the situation was worst in Germany, where there existed "the greatest divergence between the school and everyday life."18 Schoolboy suicides did occur with some regularity in these years, but the numbers involved were small and the rate did not exceed that for boys the same age who did not attend secondary schools. In Prussia, the numbers of suicides for the years from 1883 to 1890 were seventeen, fourteen, ten, eight, eighteen, eleven, twenty, and eleven; similar figures persisted until at least 1903. In many cases, the schools did not bear any direct responsibility: disappointment in love, quarrels with parents, and other causes often triggered the boys' actions.1» Yet the daily press, which often covered individual cases in great detail, did not make such fine distinctions: if a Gytnnasiast took his life, it was described as "another schoolboy suicide." The frequency of about one suicide per month in Prussia throughout the 1880s kept the problem in the public eye; that most of the dead came from the "better families" disturbed the critics of this apparent degeneracy all the more. A few newspapers tended to blame the parents for the moral failings of their sons, some pointed to the general nervousness of modern life, but most directed sharp criticism at the sec­ ondary schools. Following a triple suicide in Berlin in 1889, the worst year for suicides, the Berliner Tageblatt editorial17

SB, XIV:z, pp. 685-688 (13 December 1880). G. Masaryk, Der Selbstmord als sociale Massenerscbeinung der modemen Civilization (Vienna, 1881), pp. v, 70. See also Hartwich, Woran wir leiden, p. z6. '» "Die Selbstmorde von Schiilern in Preussen, 1883-1888," Zt. des Kdniglichen Preussischen statistischen Bureaus 30 (i89o):xxxiii; Albert Eulenburg, "Schiilerselbstmorde," Zt. fiir pddagogische Psychologie 9 (1907):131. Eulenburg's article was based on all cases of attempted suicide recorded by the Prussian Ministry of Education between 1880 and 1903. 18 Thomas

(12-5)

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

ized, "The youthful suicides of recent years, who were plunged into mental anguish and despair by failing grades, are so many blood witnesses to a perverse educational practice."20 A more solidly documented indication of the evil effects of overburdening was the rising age of the average Gymnasium graduate during this period of expanding enrollments. Be­ tween 1869 and 1881, the proportion of graduates who re­ ceived their Abitur before their twentieth birthday fell from 51 to 27 percent, which confirms the impression gleaned from pupils' autobiographies that even good pupils often repeated a grade.11 When these graduates entered the universities, they presented further evidence of having been overworked in their school days. Miquel told the House of Deputies in 1877, "Many professors complain that the proper desire for knowl­ edge and true love of scholarship are no longer present in their former measure." Throughout the 1880s, deputies from the liberal and the Catholic parties frequently charged that the dissipation of first- and second-year students resulted from overburdening and overregulation in the last years of second­ ary school. One professor of medicine said of such exhausted students, "It is as if their youthful spirit has atrophied and lost its freshness through the preponderant occupation with grammatical sophistry." In the mid-i88os, this problem be­ came so critical in the legal faculties that some professors advocated instituting intermediate examinations before the end of the normal course, a sharp break with the cherished German tradition of freedom of learning, in order to force law students to work harder in their first two years." 10 Berliner Tageblatt, 1 0 October 1 8 8 9 . The Catholic Kolnische Volkszeitung of the same date asked, "What was the nature of their religious instruc­ tion and their moral upbringing at home?" 11 SB, XV: 2 , p. 1, 1 8 4 (5 February 1 8 8 4 ) . "SB, XIII: 2 , p. 5 8 0 ( z 8 November 1 8 7 7 ) ; XIV: 2 , pp. 6 8 3 , 6 8 9 ( 1 3 De­ cember 1880); XIV:3, p. 929 (17 March 1882); XV:2, p. 1,137 (i February 1884); XVI:2, pp. 437-440 (23 February 1887); Friedrich von Esmarsch, in PA 28 (1886):134. On the problem of lazy law students, see Gustav Schmoller's comments in Jahrbuch fiir Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtsehaft im Deutsehen Reich 10 (1886):612-614; Franz von Liszt, Die Reform

(lZ6)

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

The campaign against overburdening received both its full­ est expression and its greatest prestige in a speech that Wilhelm Preyer, professor of physiology at the University of Jena and a pioneer in the study of child psychology, delivered be­ fore the Scientists' and Physicians' Convention in 1887. Preyer rehearsed for this august assembly all the charges that others had raised about the damage done by the classical schools, adding that there was "much too much teaching and much too little exercise in the Gymnasien," a situation that pro­ moted "obesity and nervousness."1' By this time, however, the conviction that, as one reformer put it, "overburdening [was] an established fact" had conquered most of those willing to believe in the guilt of the schools; Preyer's remarks, there­ fore, only confirmed previously held opinions. Unbelievers labeled his speech "a demagogic mockery of all scholarly method" and "a singular mixture of thoughts illogically strung together," giving the impression of "the greatest one-sidedness, obstinacy, and superficiality."14 These attacks on Preyer epitomize much of the response to the charges about overburdening by Gymnasium teachers and directors. Many simply said that they had experienced no overburdening during their own school days or among their pupils; the fact that it was usually the better teachers from the better schools who affirmed this may have colored such perceptions. Oskar Jaeger of Cologne deflected the major thrust of the criticism of the excessive demands made on pupils by arguing on several occasions that it was not the classics that produced overburdening, as the reformers insisted, but the numerous less important subjects in the Gymnasium—modern languages, geography, science, drawing. A substantial number of the teachers who admitted that a problem existed placed des juristischen Studiums in Preussen (Berlin, 1886); and Schriften des Vereins fur Sozialpolitik 34 (1887). WiIheIm Preyer, Biologische Zeitfragen (Berlin, 1889), PP- 21 and 165, passim. *· E. Falch, Gedanken iiber eine Reform unseres Mittelschulwesens (Wiirzburg, 1888), p. 16; BfhS 5 (1888):1; B/fcS 4 (1887):188.

(12.7)

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

the blame for it on parents: boys who smoked and drank at home and attended parties and the theater at night could not be expected to do their homework as well and still maintain good health. Several educators argued that it was just the "ballast" who suffered from overburdening: boys who could not do the work demanded of them in a Gymnasium should be attending a higher Biirgerschule or learning a trade.2' How­ ever, no one ever attempted to establish a direct correlation between the socially inferior and the mentally overstrained at the classical schools; indeed, the demands for an easier Gym­ nasium may well have stemmed in part from fears by upperclass parents that their less intelligent sons would flunk out of the Gymnasium and be forced into less prestigious careers. To the educational conservatives, easing requirements in the Gymnasium in order to lessen a spurious overburdening appeared as another step on the descent into superficiality initiated by the new curriculum of 1882. For those Germans convinced of the reality of overburdening, however, the fears it aroused made the need for urgent remedial action obvious. These fears went beyond the understandable concerns with the unpleasantness of nearsightedness, general unfitness, or suicide; even the threat to the national defense posed by the large numbers of unfit volunteers, the reserve officers of the future, was not the heart of the problem for most people. At its deepest level, the worries about overburdening formed part of the more comprehensive but less precise fears and pessi­ mism of the fitt-de-siecle, with its overwhelming sense of de­ cline and degeneration. Social fears on the part of the upper classes did not play the dominant role in this aspect of the 1S General denials of the existence of overburdening include Gustav Wendt, Dte Gymnasten und dte offentltche Metnung (Karlsruhe, 1883), pp. 10, 32; Hermann Schiller, "Die Ueberburdungsfrage und die Schule," ZfGW 39 (1885):1-14; Karl Kruse, "Das angeklagte Gymnasium," ZfGW 42 (1888):346; Schrader, Die Verfassung der hoheren Schulett, p. 11. Oskar Jaeger's com­ ments m NJ 128 (1883):494 and NJ 140 (1888):159; for the "ballast" and overburdening, see Adolf Matthias, Aus Schule, Unterrtcht und Erztehung (Munich, 1901), pp. 14, 80.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

pessimism of the 1880s; more important was the belief, nur­ tured by vulgarized Darwinism, that modern civilization was putting demands on human capacities that would cause phys­ ical damage capable of being passed on to future generations. An article published in the Gartenlaube shortly before the school conference of 1890 exemplified this vague apprehen­ sion: "Our age suffers from nervous debility, the sickness of the nineteenth century, which results from the changing life­ style brought about by the progress of our culture, which strains the mind and neglects the body.. .. The basis for this situation is laid in youth by a perverse education. The facts are indisputable: our youth lacks the lively disposition that characterized earlier generations."16 What could be done to counteract this trend toward de­ generacy? In most cases, identifying the causes of the excessive strain on pupils meant pointing out the cures. If classrooms were poorly lit, ventilated, and heated, or if boys sat on benches that hurt their posture, such conditions must be improved. With the advice of men such as Hermann Cohn and Rudolf Virchow, the German states accomplished much in this area in the late nineteenth century, building what fiscal conserva­ tives often called "school palaces." As previously mentioned, however, most critics located the sources of overburdening in the curricula and teaching methods, not in the physical con­ ditions of the schools. Noting the long hours that pupils spent in class and doing their homework, one anonymous author asked rhetorically, "What factory owner would the law allow to employ his young workers for so long?" The spreading practice of using specialists to teach each subject became a major target for these school reformers, who believed that it led to excessive homework assignments because no teacher had the pupil's entire load in view. Many reformers also joined the conservative Jaeger in condemning the vareity of subjects that boys had to learn, a criticism even more applicable to " Die Gartenlaube (1890):219.

( i z9)

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

the Realgymnasien than to the Gymnasien.17 Their conclusion that a greater concentration on a few major subjects was needed ran directly counter to the "demands of the present" for less Latin and Greek and more time for sciences and mod­ ern languages in the Gymnasium; so did their desire for a reduction in classroom hours and homework to levels more commensurate with pupils' abilities. Many reformers interested in easing the strain on German schoolboys asserted, as so many pupils did later in their mem­ oirs, that the majority of secondary school teachers did not know how to teach. The reason for this was simple: no one ever taught them how. During most of the nineteenth century, the influence of pedagogical theorists such as Pestalozzi, Her­ bert, and Frobel remained confined to the elementary schools; in 1873, Ludwig Wiese of the Prussian Ministry of Education lamented, "True pedagogical interest, the awareness that teaching is an art to be learned, appears to have diminished."28 In the 1860s and 1870s, before the overcrowding of the teach­ ing profession developed, the rapid expansion of the second­ ary schools made the "practice year" adopted in 1826—a few hours per week of teaching combined with pedagogical stud­ ies—into a farce by forcing most beginners to carry a full teaching load. In the 1880s, however, a significant flowering of interest in better training for secondary school teachers coincided with the rising fears about overburdening. Friedrich Paulsen deliv­ ered his first lectures on pedagogics at the University of Berlin in 1877; by 1882, he attracted 268 students, a very large number at the time. In the 1880s also, the topics chosen by teachers for the essays published annually with the program of each secondary school began a marked swing away from " Die Grenzboten 49 (1890):467; SB, XIV-.3, p. 916 (17 March 1882); Ludwig Kotelmann, 1st die heutige Jugend der hoberen Lehranstalten mit Schularbeit iiberbiirdetf (Hamburg, 1881), p. 11; Hasemann, Ueberbiirdung, p. 34; COlR 3 (1875):705. 18 Ibid., p. 706; Falch, Gedanken uber eine Reform, p. 17; Wiese in Cewtralblatt, 1874, p. 6.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

classical philology toward methods of instruction.1» Several periodicals were founded that advocated the adoption of var­ ious forms of Herbartianism for instruction in the secondary schools; their differences were less important than the interest in improved teaching that they exhibited. Two groups quar­ reled over where teacher training should take place: one group, led by Hermann Schiller of Giessen and Otto Frick of the Francke's Foundations in Halle, believed in small seminars attached to Gymnasien, whereas the other group, under the tutelage of Wilhelm Rein at the University of Jena, wanted this training integrated with the future teachers' scholarly pur­ suits at the university.'0 Most of these pedagogical reformers concentrated their crit­ icism of existing conditions on instruction in foreign lan­ guages. In a seminal essay published in 1873, a Gymnasium teacher named Hermann Perthes argued against the deductive method of teaching Latin grammar to ten-year-old boys, ad­ vocating instead an inductive approach based on graded read­ ers. Another influential pamphlet, published under a pseu­ donym in 1882 by Wilhelm Vietor, professor of English at Marburg, extended Perthes's thoughts a step further, blaming much of the problem of overburdening on the drilling of Latin grammar into young minds through the repetition of senseless written exercises and disconnected examples. Vietor asked, "Who will seriously deny that the fruits of such reading can »» Paulsen, Autobiography, p. 280; Richard Ullrich, "Programmwesen und Programmbibliothek der hoheren Schulen," ZfGW 61 (1907):268-269. '° On Herbart, see Harold B. Dunkel, Herbartand Herbarttamsm (Chicago, 1970). For Hermann Schiller's views, see his Ueber dte padagogtsche Vorbtldungzum hoheren Lehramt (Giessen, 1877), and Lehrbuch der Gesehtehte der Padagogtk (Leipzig, 1904); for Otto Fnck, see his Padagogtsche und dtdakttsehe Abhandlungen, ed. Georg Fnck (2 vols.; Halle, 1893), and Wilhelm Fries, Dte Franekeschen Sttftungen tn threm zwetten Jahrhundert (Halle, 1898), pp. 206-221; for Wilhelm Rein, his journal Padagogtsche Studten, as well as his collected essays, Kunst, Poltttk, Padagogtk (4 vols.; Langensalza, 1910-1914). Compare G. Stanley Hall's complaints about American teachers' lack of interest in pedagogy cited in Krug, The Shaping of the American Htgh School, p. 119.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

be little else than mental confusion, frivolity, absent-mind­ edness, superficiality, and lack of interest?" He believed that languages were best learned through speaking and reading, and that modern tongues should precede Latin in the Gym­ nasium; he was thus a supporter of a common foundation for all secondary schools.31 Another reformer calling for new teaching methods viewed the existing sequence of languages as the "most completely wrongheaded [sequence] conceivable from the psychological viewpoint"; a fourth said that the current teaching of Latin in Sexta produced "habituation to mechanical, unthinking mental exercise, minimal develop­ ment of reason, complete neglect of the fantasy and the heart, overburdening of the memory, and—last not least—a deeply rooted aversion to Latin as the ultimate result." As one of Vietor's followers explained to an American audience, these men "made their first appearance as accusers. They would be heard far and wide, hence [they] used strong language."'1 This movement to reform the traditional instruction in grammar received a powerful boost from no less a lover of classical antiquity than Heinrich Schliemann, the self-educated discoverer of Troy, who wrote: Of the Greek grammar, I learned only the declensions and the verbs, and never lost my precious time in studying its rules; for as I saw that boys, after being troubled and tor­ mented for eight years and more in schools with tedious rules of grammar, can nevertheless . . . [not] write a letter in ancient Greek without making hundreds of atrocious blunders, I thought the method pursued by the schoolmas­ ters must be altogether wrong, and that a thorough knowl­ edge of the Greek grammar could only be obtained by prac>' Hermann Perthes, Zur Reform des latetmschen Untemchts auf Gymnasten und Realsehulen (Berlin, 1876); Quosque Tandem [Wilhelm Vietor], Der Spraehunterrteht muss umkehren (zd ed.; Berlin, 1886), p. 23. Falch, Gedanken uber erne Reform, p. 29; L. Vieweger, Das Etnheitsgymnastum als psyehologtsehes Problem behandelt (Danzig, 1887), p. 11; Leo Bahlsen, "New Methods of Teaching Modern Languages," Teachers College Record 4 (1903):172-173.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

tice. . . . I learnt ancient Greek as I would have learnt a living language. . . . I am perfectly acquainted with all the grammatical rules without even knowing whether or not they are contained in the grammars.33 Schliemann obviously loved the classics, but some proposals for easing the strain on pupils moved beyond improving teach­ ing methods and reducing the hours spent in class to de­ manding elimination of the ancient languages from German secondary education. Wilhelm Preyer played the key role in tying the issue of overburdening to the calls for a radical modernization of the schools. Insisting that writing Latin es­ says constituted "a hindrance to natural development," Preyer told the Scientists' and Physicians' Convention in 1887, "Spir­ itually, we all stand so far removed from classical antiquity, much farther than our grandfathers did, we are interested so much more in the living, the actual, the present, which we find much more agreeable and appropriate for our children, that we should finally stop wounding ourselves [through oblig­ atory study of Latin and Greek]." He characterized education as a struggle between generations always won by the younger, advising the older generation not to make "desperate attempts to maintain bygones no longer essential."'-» Preyer, Hartwich, and the other school reformers concerned with overburdening did not propose only these essentially negative restrictions on the type and amount of work de­ manded of secondary school pupils; they also urged positive measures to improve the physical prowess of German youth through gymnastics and games. Hartwich insisted, "Our youth must learn to play"; another reformer added, "Most pupils are too soon old, completely outgrowing 'childish' games."3S Interest in physical education burgeoned simultaneously with the fears about degeneration: only one month after Dr. Hasse's » Heinrich Schliemann, Ilios (London, 1880), p. 15. 34 Preyer, Biologische Zeitfragen, pp. 23, 64. » Hartwich, Woran wir leiden, p. 37; Wilhelm Miinch, in J. B. Meyer, ed., Die Schuliiberbiirdungsfrage (Bonn, 1882), part 3, p. 19.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

speech on mental illness among schoolboys, the Philologists' and Schoolmasters' Convention devoted a session to the role of gymnastics in the schools for the first time in many years. Between 1880 and 1886, seven of the nine Prussian provinces that held triennial congresses of school directors had discus­ sions of the same topic.'6 In these years, several school re­ formers fought for the adoption of competitive sports on the model of the English public schools, but in general even those who saw a need for training the body as well as the mind preferred the traditional German gymnastics.*7 The movement for improved physical education even attracted a number of educators who were skeptical of the existence of overburden­ ing: as one defender of the Gymnasium said, "Just because little attention was paid to such things in the past, it does not follow that we should not trouble ourselves with them now."38 One of the leading figures in this movement for more phys­ ical activity in the schools was the National Liberal deputy Emil von Schenckendorff, an unlanded noble from Gorlitz. With the support of the director of the local Gymnasium, Gustav Eitner, Schenckendorff helped make this school a model of what could be achieved in physical education, one that was displayed to the Philologists' and Schoolmasters' Convention held in Gorlitz in 1889. In 1890, Schenckendorff instituted a survey of the facilities for athletics, inside and outside the schools, in all German towns with populations over 8,000, with the purpose of encouraging their expansion. The next year, he was instrumental in the founding of the Central Com'6 35. Versammlung deutscher Philologen und Schulmanner, pp. 159-162; M. Killmann, Dte Dtrektoren-Versammlungen des Kontgretchs Preussen von i860 bts 1889 (Berlm, 1890), pp. 183-197. For the large upswing in literature dealing with physical education that occurred in the early 1880s, see the bibliography in Emil von Schenckendorff and F. A. Schmidt, Ueber Jugendund Volkssptele (Hannover, 1892), pp. 21-25. " Hermann Raydt, Etn gesunder Geist in etnem gesunden Korper (Han­ nover, 1886); Hasemann, Ueberburdung, p. 34; Edmund Neuendorff, Geschtchte der neueren deutschen Letbesubung, vol. 4: Die Zeit von i860 bis 1932 (Dresden, 1932), pp. 270, 278. '8J. B. Meyer, Schuluberburdungsfrage, part 1, p. 16.

OVERBURDENING OF GERMAN YOUTH

mittee for the Furthering of Popular and Youth Games. Al­ though Schenckendorff did hope to improve Germany's mil­ itary preparedness through physical fitness, after the turn of the century he resisted the efforts of others to turn physical education in the schools into premilitary drill." Influenced by Scandinavian examples, Schenckendorff also advocated another remedy for the overburdening of pupils with mental work: the introduction of industrial arts, or han­ dicrafts, into the schools. In the elementary schools, such in­ struction had the explicitly antisocialist aim of inculcating the belief that working with one's hands was an honorable oc­ cupation; even in the secondary schools, Schenckendorff hoped to break down the prejudices of the Gebildeten against "prac­ ticality." For the secondary schools, however, he conceived of handicrafts primarily as a corrective for the one-sided ed­ ucation offered in the Gymnasium. The study of handicrafts, he believed, would lead to a more harmonious development of all faculties through training of the eye and hand and re­ cuperation for the overworked brain. In 1881, Schenckendorff founded a Central Committee for Boys' Handicrafts, which in 1886 became the German Association for Boys' Handicraft Instruction. Yet in its early years this organization had little success in penetrating the secondary schools: in 1891, only nine secondary schools had shops.40 Emil Hartwich summarized the wishes of Germans upset by the overburdening of secondary school pupils when he » Fritz Schmidt, Emil von Schenckendorffs Verdienste um die korperliehe Erziehungderdeutsehen Jugend (Leipzig, 1919), pp. 26-28,10; Neuendorff, Leibesiibung, 4:286-292, 297; Hermann Raydt, Die deutsehen Stadte und das Jugendspiel (Hannover, 1891), pp. 39-43. T 73; Andreas Flitner, Die politisehe Erziehung in Deutsehland (Tu­ bingen, 1957), pp. 168-169, 175-^8. '«Weymar, Selbstverstandnis der Deutsehen, p. 204; Wilhelm Meyer-Markau, Fremdwort und Sehule (Gotha, 1887), p. 77; Laas, Der deutsche Unterrieht, p. 224; Emil Freiherr von Richthofen, Zur Gymnasial-Reform in Preussen (Magdeburg, 1887), p. 69.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

that the academic proletariat might turn to socialism. No one ever claimed that the average Gymnasium pupil was unpa­ triotic, much less loyal to another country. Seldom did anyone suggest that the secondary schools had contributed in any direct way to the rise of socialism, and then the accusation usually involved the old argument that the classics were pagan rather than Christian.1' Only a few critics recommended an increased emphasis on German studies as a means to counter Jewish influence in the schools; one of them was Nietzsche's anti-Semitic brother-in-law, Bernhard Forster. Even the "rev­ olutionary anti-Semite," Friedrich Lange, editor of the Berlin Tagliche Rundschau and one of the organizers of the most important petition for school reform, did not include criticism of Jewish influence in his agitation for a truly German edu­ cation. The only occasion when anti-Semitism intruded sig­ nificantly into the debate over secondary education before the Prussian school conference of 1890 came on 20 March of that year, when Court Chaplain Adolf Stoecker complained in the House of Deputies about the high percentage of Jewish pupils in several Berlin Gymnasien; Stoecker did not, however, men­ tion any lack of German national feeling in the schools.16 If secondary school pupils did not lack patriotism, some observers did find the younger generation lacking in that "ide­ alism" pupils were supposed to derive from the classics. Such a vague accusation could cover a multitude of sins, including materialism in both the philosophical and acquisitive senses; interestingly, this charge was being aimed at the Gymnasien as well as the Realschulen. When Paul de Lagarde examined the "charge that German youth lackjed] idealism" in 1885, •» BfhS 7 (1890):49-50. Forster, Zur Frage der nationalen Erziehung (Leipzig, 1883); SB, XVII:2, pp. 859-861. Richard Levy refers to Friedrich Lange as a "rev­ olutionary," as opposed to a "political," anti-Semite in his The Downfall of the Anti-Semitic Political Parties in Imperial Germany (New Haven and London, 1975), p. 2.9; yet Lange's efforts for school reform emphasized the pro-German much more than the anti-Semitic side of his character: see his Reines Deutschtum (4th ed. enl.; Berlin, 1904). 16 Bernhard

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

he concluded that the problem was not so much boys devoted exclusively to material pleasures as the failure of the older generation, including statesmen and educators, to provide a coherent system of goals and ideals that could animate the pupils in the secondary schools.17 Seven years earlier, Lagarde had said that schools should not become "breeding grounds of so-called patriotism," but most school reformers interested in rekindling idealism believed that national feeling was the only possible spark. Several of the most confident modernizers took this position: Ernst Haeckel, for example, coupled his attacks on the classical languages with the assertion: "True idealism can develop only through a lively understanding of the vigorously blossoming present on a national, German ba­ sis." Noting that "it was not the nation of classical dreamers and scholars, as Germany used to be known, but the nation in arms that has achieved greatness," Wilhelm Preyer wanted boys to learn earlier in their school careers "what it is to be a German." Bismarck also associated idealism with patriot­ ism: when he received huge gifts from the German people on his seventieth birthday in 1885, he devoted half the sum to a foundation for the support of secondary teachers because, as he told Kaiser Wilhelm I, their "teaching is the nursery of our national sentiment. The idealistic consciousness which infuses the teaching profession ... is the moral counterweight to the materialism of our time."18 A sense of the need for national reinvigoration, which had little to do directly with the schools, permeated much of the writing about the desirability of fostering idealism and patri­ otism through education. As early as 1881, Lagarde had won­ dered where the new men who would lead Germany in the 17 Lagarde, Deutsche Schriften, pp. 430-439. As a companion piece to this essay, see J. B. Meyer and W. Kohler, Die angebliche sittliche Verwilderung der Jugend unserer Zeit und die behauptete Mitschuld der Schule (Bonn, 1884). 18 Lagarde, Deutsche Schriften, p. 107; Haeckel, "Real-Gymnasien," p. 547; Preyer, Biologische Zeitfragen, pp. 62, 28; Fritz Stern, Gold and Iron (New York, 1977), p. 301.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

post-Bismarckian era would come from; he saw no new faces that had emerged since 1866. In the course of the 1880s, this concern with new men to attack new tasks spread; the peculiar German disposition to feelings of epigonism, which had arisen in the 1830s after the passing of the cultural heroes of the classical era, surfaced again among those who felt overshad­ owed and oppressed by the successes of the generation that had achieved German unification. Such feelings certainly con­ tributed to the demands for the acquisition of colonies that arose in these years: in his call for the formation of a Society for German Colonization, the African explorer Karl Peters wrote, "We must show the world that the German people have inherited the old German national spirit of our fathers along with the imperial splendor!" In the opinion of some school reformers, a "German education" was the best way to insure the creation of the new men needed to consolidate the Reich and move on to greater heights. Several reformers who encouraged the introduction of sports into the schools to counter overburdening also argued that a patriotic education should combine with better physical conditioning to prevent national degeneration.1» This combination of fears of decline with an emphasis on a "German education" came to the fore quite clearly in the movement that emerged in the 1880s for purging the German language of foreign accretions. In the pamphlet that gave the major stimulus to this interest in what was called "language purification," Hermann Riegel, an art historian who was di•» Lagarde, Deutsche Schriften, p. 98; Karl Peters, Gesammelte Schriften (3 vols.; Munich, 1943-1944), 1:152; Forster, Zur Frage der nationalen Erziehung, p. 17; Raydt, Ein gesunder Geist, pp. 9, Z40; Gustav Eitner, Die Jugendspiele (Leipzig, 1891), p. 8. The role of generational factors in German nationalism and imperialism in the Wilhelmine era has received some attention, as in A.J.P. Taylor's The Course of German History (id ed.; London, 1961), and more recently in Geoff Eley's Reshaping the German Right (New Haven and London, 1980). It is an area that appears worthy of further research. A very interesting study of the effects of epigonism on the individual level can be found in Arthur Mitzman's biography of Max Weber, The Iron Cage (New York, 1969).

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

rector of the ducal museum in Braunschweig, spoke of the "unnatural degeneration of our noble language" through the use of foreign words and derivatives. In the call he issued for the foundation of a German Language Association, Riegel claimed, "The abuse of foreign words coincides with times of national humiliation." This was certainly a surprising evalu­ ation of Germany thirteen years after its victory over France. The German Language Association, which grew to 12,000 members in 1891, concerned itself primarily with matters other than the schools, especially with purifying the German used by the bureaucracy and the press; in the first of these areas, it followed up efforts begun by the Postmaster-General, Heinrich von Stephan. In his pamphlet Riegel had also complained that "the German language has been severely neglected in the schools for a long, long time," and his supporters endeavored to remedy this situation as well.20 In anticipation of the Prus­ sian school conference of 1890, the German Language As­ sociation adopted the following resolutions: i. Through the demand to speak good German, German youth will be obliged to think in good German. Thus the fight against unnecessary foreign words will become a sig­ nificant means to advance intellectual Bildung and national education. z. German must be the core of all instruction. 3. Instruction in German should, through the recognition that the mother tongue is one of our nation's most precious possessions, awaken and strengthen pupils' enthusiasm for German nationality and the fatherland.21 As did those who expected patriotism to come from the study of German history, Riegel and the other purifiers of German displayed a rather naive faith in the power of classroom in10

Riegel, Hauptstuck von unserer Muttersprache, pp. 2 9 , 4 9 ; PA 2 8 Wilhelm Cremer, Ketn Fremdwort fur das, was deutsch gut ausgedruckt werden kann (Hannover-Linden, 1891), p. 33; Wilhelm Pfaff, Zum Kampfum deutsche Ersatzworter (Giessen, 1 9 3 3 ) , p . 1 4 . " Zt. des Allgemetnen Deutschen Sprachveretns 5 ( 1 8 9 0 ) : 1 5 0 - 1 5 2 . (1886): 3 50-351;

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

struction to influence later political beliefs; their proposals certainly stopped far short of systematic indoctrination as it has been practiced in the twentieth century. As critics of the Gymnasium, however, these advocates of a more national education added to the chorus of complaints about the in­ adequacies of the classical schools for the new Reich. The most famous, or infamous, expression of the need for national regeneration through education was Julius Langbehn's Rembrandt as Educator, which appeared anonymously early in 1890 and immediately became a best seller. In the first sentence of the book Langbehn asserted, "It has by now become an open secret that the spiritual life of the German people is currently in a state of gradual, some would even say rapid, decay." The primary source of this decline, Langbehn believed, was the excessive specialization and rationalism reigning in the academic world; he claimed that "the professor is the German national disease." The professor's spirit, or lack of spirit, had infected the entire educational system, particu­ larly the treatment of the classics in the Gymnasium. Langbehn found pupils in the secondary schools to be "blase and tired of education, mentally and all too often physically bald," desperately in need of a "healthy lust for life." The rebirth of German cultural life that he preached could not transpire without a reform of education, one of the goals of which should be "to bridge the gap between the Gebildeten and the Ungebildeten." In Langbehn's view, this educational reform must be based on the national culture because "foreign cul­ tural elements are only of secondary importance in any edu­ cation." Langbehn did not, however, look to German history and literature as the keys to this renewal, but to German art, represented for him by Rembrandt, because he believed that art was a more effective means to reach all levels of the pop­ ulation.11 Langbehn never descended from his outpourings of genl2Julius Langbehn, Rembrandtals Erzieher (Weimar, 1943), pp. 1, 63, 91, 102, 222, 32, 159, 69. For a sensible discussion of Langbehn, see part II of Stern, Politics of Cultural Despair.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

eralities to recommend any detailed reforms of the secondary schools. But two other works written in somewhat the same antiintellectualist spirit and also published in 1890, Hugo Goering's The New German School and Paul Giissfeldt's The Education of German Youth, did offer some concrete, if far­ fetched, proposals for restructuring German education.1' Nei­ ther Goering, an itinerant scholar and pedagogue, nor Gussfeldt, famous in his day as a mountain climber and explorer, was a great intellect or even a leading figure in the debate over school reform; nevertheless, both are interesting because they advocated the most radical departures from the existing school sytem in this period and because of their possible influence on Kaiser Wilhelm II.14 Goering described his "new German school" as a school for living rather than a school for learning; contrary to the German tradition, it would be a boarding institution, where practical activity would receive greater em­ phasis than reading and writing. Goering shared most of the objections to the Gymnasium that other reformers had raised; he insisted that his proposed remedies were thoroughly mod­ ern, having their sources in the "richly expanding intellectual life of our age." His most radical idea involved having all pupils go through an eight-year common foundation from age six to fourteen, the period of compulsory education in Prussia; in this stage, all boys would receive "general training for prac­ tical life," including instruction in handicrafts and agriculture. From age fourteen to sixteen, boys who continued would prepare for military, technical, and commercial careers, emerging as roughly equivalent to graduates of higher Biirgerschulen with the one-year-volunteer privilege. During this time, they would also study Latin, but "realist" and a "humanist" di­ vision would appear only for those who went on to a fouryear upper division to prepare for the universities. Although Hugo Goering, DteneuedeutscheSchule (Leipzig, 1890); Paul Gussfeldt, Die Erztehung der deutschen Jugend (Berlin, 1890), which was a slight re­ vision of articles that had appeared in January and February 1890 in the Deutsche Rundschau. See chapter 6, pp. 178—179 of this book.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

Goering knew that his new German school could begin only as a single private venture, his ambitions were broader, be­ lieving as he did that in educational matters Germany had relied on "patchwork long enough finally to weave new ma­ terial in new forms."1* Paul Giissfeldt's ideas echoed Goering's in many respects, although he preferred that pupils spend their evenings and weekends, but not their lunch hours or afternoons, at home. He wanted much time spent on practical instruction and phys­ ical exercise; Giissfeldt believed that the best pupil was not the one with the highest grades, but the one who "promised the most in life." Within the classroom he desired "fewer facts and more Bildungpupils would study only the fundamentals of Latin and Greek and learn to write good German instead of "Ciceronian prose." In his most unusual proposal, Giissfeldt argued that "for growing boys history should be the equivalent of fairy tales for children, an expression of the triumph of virtue over vice." In this way, pupils could enter the adult world filled with idealism.16 The movement for a greater emphasis on the German na­ tional heritage in secondary education thus encompassed a broad spectrum of people, ranging from those such as Oskar Jaeger who were not interested in a major reform of the Gym­ nasium or in a politically oriented history instruction through moderate reformers such as Friedrich Paulsen to such extrem­ ists as Hugo Goering and Paul Giissfeldt; the tendency of some recent scholarship on nationalism in German education to portray the most radical outsiders as representative of the mainstream of German pedagogical thinking is very mislead­ ing. 17 Simplistic classifications such as "imperialists" or "volkz> Goering, Die neue deutsche Schule, pp. vii, I, 4, 126, 67, 52, 12, 138. Both Goering and Gussfeldt wrote in Latinic script, not the old Gothic hand­ writing; in the Germany of the 1880s, this was usually viewed as an affir­ mation of modernity, one much despised by Bismarck. 14 Giissfeldt, Erziehung der deutschen Jugend., pp. 72Γ-73, 141, 75, 95, 86, 126. 17 See particularly R. H. Samuel and R. Hinton Thomas, Education and

(!S3)

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

isch thinkers" cannot characterize all these men; neither can every call for a more national education be dismissed as an effort to induce loyalty to the existing order in the lower classes. The more radical nationalists tended to view their own proposals as efforts to be in step with the times, and rather than aiming at reinforcing class differences, aimed more at the social reconciliation that a common foundation could provide. Yet it would be a serious misinterpretation of the situation in the 1880s to attribute more influence to the Goerings and Forsters than to men such as Oskar Jaeger and Friedrich Paulsen, whose interest in improving instruction in German history and literature cannot be considered in any sense pathological. It must be remembered that the German interest in a na­ tional education was hardly unique in the late nineteenth cen­ tury, although concern with the national and the patriotic in the schools does appear to have played a larger role in the discussions of secondary school reform in Germany than else­ where. In France under Napoleon III there had been efforts to stimulate patriotism through instruction in French history, and after the Franco-Prussian War anti-German sentiment permeated the elementary schools. But the major critics of the classical lycees in the 1870s and 1880s did not speak of a need to foster love of country among pupils.18 In England, where the mother tongue and national history suffered much more neglect in secondary education than they did in Ger­ many, the rhetoric of manliness and empire in the late nine­ teenth century also brought an increasingly chauvinistic tone to the schools, but this remained divorced from the subjects of instruction and evolved without much of the conscious preaching found in Germany. As one German visitor to EngSociety in Modern Germany (London, 1949), pp. 17-23; and George Mosse, The Crisis of German Ideology (New York, 1964), pp. 152-168. 18 Anderson, Education in France, p. 73; Digeon, La crise allemande de la pensee fran^aise, pp. 366-368; but also Sally Tiesdell Gershmann, "Ernest Lavisse and the Uses of Nationalism, 1870-1914" (Ph.D. diss., University of Missouri, 1978), pp. 30-32, 133-140.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

land put it, "This strong national feeling is not artificially produced in the English boys; in fact, I received the impression that we Germans talk much more about patriotism than they do here."29 In Russia, especially under the Minister of Edu­ cation Dmitri Tolstoi in the 1860s and 1870s, the tendency was to shield pupils from political matters rather than to indoctrinate them with specific beliefs, although after an at­ tempt on the Tsar's life in 1879 Tolstoi did stress "the faculty's obligation to inoculate its pupils against the 'noxious infection of the anarchists' harmful teachings.' " Although Russian lan­ guage and history received a slight increase in hours in 1890, Minister of Education Bogolepov reported in 1899 that many teachers and parents were complaining about the neglect of these fields in the schools.30 Even in the United States, the Committee of Ten asserted that instruction in history "fur­ nishes the best training in patriotism." "This is particularly the case with the history of one's own country, and America needs the training because we Americans know that our coun­ try is great better than we know why it is great."31 The demands for a Germanized secondary education evoked an ambivalent response from the friends of the Gymnasium, who could hardly oppose the goal of producing patriotic young men fluent in their mother tongue, but who did not necessarily agree with the proposed means for attaining this goal, or even that it was not already being met. Both Nietzsche and Treitschke, for example, bemoaned the decline of their mother tongue into a "journalistic German" and looked to the secondary schools to reverse this trend, but neither spoke of fostering patriotism in the schools. As previously mentioned, Treitschke even wanted to reduce the time devoted to history instruc*» David Newsome, Godliness and Good Learning (London, 1961), pp. 200-201; Rupert Wilkinson, Gentlemanly Power (London, 1964), p. 102; Raydt, Ein gesunder Geist, p. 195. 30 Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, pp. 17, 56-66, 174, 210; Alston, Education and the State in Tsarist Russia, p. 140; DhG 2 (1891):146. »' Report of the Committee of Ten, p. 169.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

tion.'1 Adolf Matthias of Diisseldorf claimed that secondary school pupils did not lack national feelings anyway; he an­ swered the argument that boys needed to study modern Ger­ man history in order to understand contemporary political issues by saying, "Roman history from the age of the Gracchi through the birth of Christ and the first few centuries A.D. offers the best propadeutic for all social questions," an attitude echoed by several other defenders of the traditional classical education." The most interesting example of this resistance by repre­ sentatives of the old guard to calls for a more nationally ori­ ented education came in 1889. When Hermann Riegel's Ger­ man Language Association attempted to have the government dictate Germanizations of foreign words to be used in the schools, Erich Schmidt, professor of German literature at the University of Berlin, organized a declaration against any such government intrusion. This declaration rejected any such pol­ icy "on the basis of the development and needs, the cosmo­ politan adaptability and the national powers of resistance of our language, literature, and education"; it also spoke of "the right of our leading writers to choose their words advisedly." Among the select few asked to sign this declaration, and who did so, were the Court Chaplains Rudolf Kogel and Emil Frommel, the famous writers Paul Heyse, Gustav Freytag, Theodor Fontane, Ernst Wildenbruch, and Friedrich Spielhagen, leading Gymnasium directors such as Oskar Jaeger, Gustav Uhlig, and Dietrich Volkmann of Schulpforta, and the well-known professors Heinrich von Sybel, Eduard Zeller, Heinrich von Treitschke, Rudolf Virchow, Ernst Curtius, Hans Delbruck, Adolf von Harnack, Theodor Mommsen, Gustav Schmoller, and Rudolf von Gneist.'* Clearly, the defense of " Nietzsche, "Ueber die Zukunft unserer Bildungsanstalten," pp. 169,177; Treitschke, "Einige Bemerkungen iiber ur^er Gymnasialwesen," p. 183. » Matthias, Aus Schule, Unterricht und Erziehung, pp. 37, 36; Schreyer, Das humanistische Gymnasium, pp. 5-10; Rudolf Hirzel, Ueber die Stellung der classischen Philologie in der Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1888), p. 32. 54 PJ 63 (1889):312-313,419. SeealsotheletterfromTreitschketo Gustav

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

the Gymnasium and of academic freedom by these leading German intellectuals in 1889 still demonstrated the sort of cosmopolitan liberalism for which the German Gelbildeten had been known earlier in the century. The advocates of Germanizing the Gymnasium generally did not become the targets of vituperative attacks from con­ servatives such as those directed at Wilhelm Preyer or the Realschulmanner, both because they posed a weaker threat to the classical schools than did the other groups of reformers and because many conservatives did sympathize with their ultimate goals. The exception was Paul Giissfeldt, who ter­ rified the conservatives not only by the radical nature of his proposals, but also by his close relations with Wilhelm II: it was rumored that Wilhelm had read the drafts of Gussfeldt's The Education of German Youth before it was published." Hermann Kropatscheck of the Conservative party accused Giissfeldt of everything from atheism and dilettantism to hos­ tility to the family and "sovereign disrespect for the historical basis of our school system"; other reviews of his book adopted a similar tone.'6 In sharp contrast with the issues of overburdening, the overcrowded professions, and privileges in the civil service, the calls for a more German education never led to any debates in the Prussian legislature; neither did they elicit much of a response from the Ministry of Education. In 1887, Gustav von Gossler did notify the Provincial School Authorities of the desirability of extending history instruction in the sec­ ondary schools up to 1871. He refrained, however, from any official decree mandating this, did not provide for more time Freytag in Treitschke's Briefe, ed. Max Cornicelius (3 vols.; Leipzig, 1920), 3:600-601. » Mitteilungen des Vereins fur Schulreform, no. 4 (3 March 1890):36; DndS ι (1889):541; COIR 18 (1890):316. >' Hermann Kropatscheck, Die Erziehung der deutschen Jugend (Branden­ burg, 1890), pp. 4, 6, i. Other negative responses to Gussfeldt include Paul de Lagarde, Paul Gussfeldt (Berlin, 1890), and Carl Conradt, Dilettantentum, Lehrerscbaft und Vertvaltung in unserem hoheren Schulwesen (Wiesbaden, 1890).

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

for the additional material to be handled, and attributed no political purpose whatsoever to this instruction. In January 1888, Gossler explicitly rejected teaching an antisocialist eco­ nomics in the elementary schools, preferring instead to rely on traditional religious instruction as the primary means to guard against "economic heresies."37 Only a general revision of the curricula for the secondary schools could have created the additional time for German literature and history that reformers were demanding, and there is no evidence that GossIer was even remotely considering such a revision as of 1888. THE "MASS PETITION FOR THOROUGHGOING SCHOOL REFORM"

If the demands for a national education never put enough concerted pressure on the Prussian government to provoke the type of official response that Gossler made to the Realschulmanner and to Wilhelm Preyer's speech on overburden­ ing, they did supply the leaven that helped combine school reformers of all shades in a petition drive that threatened to overwhelm Gossler's defense of the status quo and produce a secondary school reform from below. What became known as the "Mass Petition for Thoroughgoing School Reform" had its origins in a meeting held on 3 July 1887 by an organization known as the German Academic Union, founded by a Berlin physician named Konrad Kiister who was active in efforts to reform the BurschenschaftenJs Among those attending this session devoted to secondary school reform were Friedrich Lange of the Tagliche Rundschau; Emil von Schenckendorff, the National Liberal deputy and advocate of sports and han­ dicrafts in the schools; and Theodor Peters of the German Engineers' Association, who was still incensed by the failure of the House of Deputies to defend the privileges of Oberf Centralblatt, 1887, pp. 503-505; Centralblatt, 1888, pp. 286-287. '8 On Konrad Kiister and the Deutsche Akademische Vereinigung, see Adalbert von Hanstein, Das jiingste Deutschland (Leipzig, 1905), pp. 7071·

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

realschule graduates earlier that year. At the urging of Lange, those attending the meeting decided to inaugurate a mass petition to Gossler as the best way to hasten the seemingly stalled process of school reform. Owing to a lack of money within the Academic Union, Lange, Peters, Schenckendorff, and Kiister—none of whom was an educator—joined together as an "Executive Committee for German School Reform," which thus included advocates of a more national, a more scientific, and a more physical secondary education for Ger­ man youth. With financial assistance from the Engineers' As­ sociation, the Executive Committee drafted a petition and began to solicit signatures." In order to gain the widest possible support, the Executive Committee did not call for any specific reforms in its petition, asking Gossler only "to institute appropriate steps toward carrying out a thoroughgoing school reform in Germany." The Executive Committee requested two such steps: gathering proposals and opinions from "qualified circles" and then con­ sultations with "appropriate persons, . . . especially those active in modern life," on the principles to guide such a thor­ oughgoing reform. On ι February 1888, the members of the Executive Committee mailed a copy of the petition to Gossler, telling him that they expected numerous signatures, "not only because of the generally recognized need for school reform, but also because we are certain that thousands of Germans feel themselves called upon to participate in this reform."40 The death of two Kaisers in 1888 delayed the collection of signatures, however, and the final presentation of the petition to Gossler occurred only in October. Before this, the Executive Committee had addressed a separate statement to Bismarck on 30 September. Asking the Chancellor to work for second­ s' Lange, Reines Deutschtum, pp. 298-300; Peters, Geschichte des VDI, pp. 55, 62. Geoff Eley also comments on the "modernism" of Lange's na­ tionalism: Reshaping the German Right, pp. 186-187. The text and the first signatures are in NJ 138 (1888):266-277, letter from the Executive Committee to Gossler, 1 February 1888, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 114.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

ary school reform at the national level, the Committee elab­ orated more fully its own views, which proved to be an amal­ gam of the three themes that reformers had been raising for the past two decades. Lange, Peters, Schenckendorff, and Kiister wanted German language, literature, and history to be the focus of a "national secondary education" built on a sixyear common foundation as previously proposed by the En­ gineers' Association; this should give "as self-contained and practical an education as possible" while also paying close attention to the training of the body and the senses. Bismarck brushed the address aside, reportedly commenting, "I have already had to become Minister of Commerce, must I now play Minister of Education too?"*1 When Gossler finally received the Mass Petition on 11 Oc­ tober 1888, it bore 22,409 signatures. Lange's Tagliche Rund­ schau and the Engineers' Association apparently played major roles in the gathering of signatures; several reports suggested that the circulation of the petition was not as thoroughgoing as the reforms it demanded. According to Ludwig Friedrich Seyffardt, half the signatories were men active in economic life; another report indicated that 70 percent of the signatories had university-level education of some sort—including engi­ neers who had been to the technical institutes—suggesting that the Mass Petition did not circulate among the masses, but only among notables whose sons were likely to attend sec­ ondary schools. Twenty-five town councils or mayors signed the petition, as did ten chambers of commerce and the board of the German Brown Coal Industry Association. Represent­ atives of the traditional Gebildeten could also be found among its supporters, including 1,500 physicians, 300 clerics, 300 Gymnasium teachers, and 300 university professors—the lat­ ter were largely scientists. In addition to school reformers of all types—Quintin Steinbart, Wilhelm Vietor, Wilhelm Preyer, Ernst Haeckel—prominent signers included the painter Anton von Werner, the avant-garde editor Ferdinand Avenarius, PA 31 (1889):98-102; Lange, Reines Deutschtum, p. 302.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

Friedrich Krupp, General Secretary Beumer of the Central Association of German Industrialists, and Max Weber, Sr.*2 That such a disparate collection of people could unite behind a statement calling for thoroughgoing school reform testifies not only to the success of the Executive Committee in phrasing the petition, but also to the widespread discontent with the Gymnasium in the Germany of 1888. The response to the Mass Petition by individuals and or­ ganizations already active in the school question followed predictable lines. The Association for a Comprehensive School rejected the petition's ultimate goals of a common foundation and equal privileges for all schools at its annual meeting in April 1888. The Realschulmanner, although worried that the Executive Committee wanted more radical changes than they did, greeted the petition as a new impulse toward resolving all the questions of school reform, including the privileges of Realgymnasium graduates.43 Oskar Jaeger led the conserva­ tives' opposition to the Mass Petition; in a vitriolic pamphlet, he claimed that it "began as a vague murmuring from a few malcontents, was adopted by a multitude of superficial people, further strengthened by all types of good and bad forces, enthusiasts, and self-seekers, and exploited for its own pur­ poses by a lobbying organization, so that it now appears as a powerful force."** The conservatives generally objected to the role of laymen and the press in the mass petition; in its call for thoroughgoing reform they saw a thinly veiled threat to the study of Greek.4' Holzmiiller, Kampfum die Schulreform, p. 6; Seyffardt in SB, XVII: i, p. 829 (6 March 1889); Messer, Die Reformbewegung, p. 8; Preyer, Biologische Zeitfragen, p. 166. The signatures are preserved in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 114, adhib. a. « NJ 138 (1888):409, 416; COIR 16 (1888):303-304. Cited in Messer, Die Reformbewegung, p. 8.1 never obtained a copy of Oskar Jaeger's Das humanistische Gymnasium und die Petition um durchgreifende Schulreform (Wiesbaden, 1889). Preyer, Biologisehe Zeitfragen, pp. 165-166.

RAISING YOUNG GERMANS

the establishment of any common foundation or comprehen­ sive school and opposed any expansion of the privileges of Realgymnasium graduates. It also echoed Bismarck's and Gossler's attacks on the "false ambitions" of parents who sent boys to schools they had no hope of finishing, agreeing with the majority of conservatives that to destroy the Gymnasium to give the "ballast" a more practical education would be "completely wrong-headed." On 14 February 1888, an edi­ torial stated that the petition "raised serious accusations against our German school administrations without presenting a shred of evidence," and repeated the refrain about overeager parents sending unqualified pupils to the Gymnasien.4? Gossler himself took to the offensive in the legislature on 7 March with his refusal to "open the floodgates" to the universities.48 A few days later, his long fight to reduce the population of the classical schools received a boost from an unanticipated source, Kaiser Friedrich III. Upon his accession, Friedrich addressed a public decree to Bismarck that must have pleased the Chancellor, for it read in part: "I regard the care devoted to the education of the coming generation as closely tied to the social question. If, on the one hand, sec­ ondary education must be made available to ever widening circles, we must nevertheless beware of creating serious dan­ gers through Halbbildung. Among such dangers are the awak­ ening of career expectations that our national economy cannot satisfy and the one-sided pursuit of factual knowledge to the neglect of the task of moral upbringing."49 As with so much " NAZ, 8 January and 14 February 1888. PP- S4-56. Christoph Fuhr underestimates the effect of Wilhelm's initiative in this area: see Fuhr, "Die preussische Schulkonferenzen," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspoltttk in Preussen, pp. 213-219.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

secondary school reform created by Gossler's rejection of the Mass Petition. Only after nineteen months of delay and con­ fusion, a period that spanned Bismarck's resignation, did the Cabinet Order ultimately lead to the school conference where Wilhelm launched his attack against the Prussian Gymnasium. The events of these months not only provide an interesting supplement to our knowledge of the political jockeying in this period, but also reveal the extreme difficulty involved in trying to solve all aspects of the school question at once, as well as the continuing disagreement within the government and in society at large over who should decide educational policy. The major role in preparing the recommendations ordered by Gossler on 4 May fell to Karl Schneider, whose field of expertise and authority was the elementary schools and their teachers. Gossler presented these recommendations to the Ministry of State on 14 June in a memorandum that repeated the assertion that his administration had already prepared the ground for what the Kaiser desired. Bismarck, absent from Berlin most of the summer and fall, replied to the memoran­ dum from Varzin on 6 July with the comments about history instruction that have been previously mentioned and a sug­ gestion that Gossler go even further than proposed in elimi­ nating church history and dogmatic controversies from reli­ gious instruction. Gossler accepted these changes, and the Ministry of State approved the entire package in Bismarck's absence on 2.7 July. Gossler sent the recommendations on to the Kaiser on 16 August; even though they were only minimal steps toward meeting his goals, Wilhelm approved them two weeks later. Then nothing happened; the archives of the Min­ istry of Education do not reveal why Gossler failed to publish a document approved by the Ministry of State and the Kaiser, but he may have been waiting for more detailed curricular revisions and teaching materials.'1 Wilhelm's first collision with Gossler may have set the tone " Schneider, Halbes Jahrhundert, pp. 431-432; materials about the im­ plementation of the Cabinet Order in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. I, and no. 115, adhib. a. The final recommendations were published in 1890, pp. 5-9.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

for the less than cordial relations between the Kaiser and Minister of Education over the next year and a half, but it had failed to bring about a thoroughgoing school reform. Official policy toward the secondary schools remained the same; the Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung continued its campaigns against the overcrowding of the professions and the school reformers into the autumn. Within the Ministry of Education, a series of memoranda were drawn up by various officials discussing ways to use the one-year-volunteer privi­ lege to aid the expansion of the higher Biirgerschulen; neither of Verdy's proposals—a special examination or granting the privilege only at graduation—found a warm reception.'1 In­ creasingly important in these internal deliberations was the principal successor to Hermann Bonitz, Johann Stauder. A former Gymnasium director, Stauder had entered the Ministry of Education under Falk in 1875 as an "Old Catholic" who rejected papal infallibility and was willing to work against the church in the Kulturkampf. According to Friedrich Paulsen, "This Mr. Stauder was really a very insignificant person; as a successor of men like Wiese and Bonitz, in such a position he was a disgrace to German officialdom, or at any rate to the Ministry of Public Worship and Instruction." His mem­ oranda and letters from this period reveal Stauder to have been a staunch defender of the classics, an ally of Gossler in efforts to get the "ballast" out of the Gymnasien, but also an advocate of greater attention to German and of better teaching methods in both ancient and modern languages." 31 NAZ, 8 August and 3 October 1889; Ernst Hopfner, "Denkschrift betreffend die Herbeifiihrung ausgedehnteren Benutzung der lateinlosen hoheren Lehranstalten," 13 March 1889; comments on this by Johann Stauder, Wilhelm Wehrenpfennig, and Wilhelm Schrader; report by Stauder and Wehrenpfennig to Gossler, 9 September 1889; and circular from Gossler to the Provincial School Authorities—all in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z., no. 115, adhib. b, vol. I. » Obituary of Stauder (1829—1897) in DhG 8 (1897):31-34; Paulsen, Autobiography, p. 355; Stauder to Bodelschwingh, 10 December 1888, in Bodelschwingh Papers, B XI, 2, 2; Stauder's "Vorschlage betreffend Erzielung eines besseren relativen Abschlusses der Lehraufgaben an alien Vollanstalten bez. an den diesen entsprechenden unvollstandigen Voranstalten mit den

THE KAISER INTERVENES

Wilhelm himself was the first person to drop hints to the unsuspecting public of coming changes in the Prussian schools. In Hannover, for maneuvers taking place in September, he responded to a formal greeting from the faculty at the Uni­ versity of Gottingen by expressing his belief in the value of studying national history for gaining a better understanding of current social and political conditions. He hoped that in the near future the universities would receive more well-pre­ pared students and that "in the coming years the study of history will enjoy a powerful resurgence."34 In a private con­ versation the same week, Wilhelm echoed even more closely the terms of the Cabinet Order, saying, "To be acquainted with the peoples of antiquity is a fine thing, but for compre­ hending our German customs and present-day conditions it is much more important that we have a full understanding of our own modern history. That so many heads and hearts are misled by the revolutionary goals of Social Democracy stems from the inadequate portrayal of the horrors of the French Revolution and the heroic acts of the War of Liberation to the pupils in the secondary and primary schools. I hope that soon our youth will be taught these matters better at all levels."" Wilhelm's dissatisfaction with the educational administration under Gossler thus reached outside the Ministry of State to the public at large. These first public statements of the Kaiser's views on a "German education" drew sharp criticism from the left-liberal press, which claimed that history instruction already over­ emphasized heroic deeds and portrayed only the negative as­ pects of the French Revolution.'6 The Realschulmanner, how­ ever, found solace in Wilhelm's attack on the excessive sechsten Jahreskursus," in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, adhib. b, vol. I. '< RA, 16 September 1889. « Indirect quotation in RA, 30 September 1889. The Reichs-Anzeiger pub­ lished this account only after it had appeared elsewhere. Gossler met with Wilhelm on 5 October, but I found no direct or indirect report on this discussion: RA, 5 October 1889. Vossische Zeitung, 20 September and 2 October 1889; Freisinnige Zeitung, 25 and 27 September 1889. (IS?)

THE KAISER INTERVENES

preoccupation with antiquity; for the first time in several years, they petitioned the Prussian legislature to grant broader priv­ ileges to Realgymnasium graduates. The School Reform As­ sociation also gained new hopes from the Kaiser's interest in a modern, German education: in October, Friedrich Lange and Theodor Peters asked Gossler to approve experiments with a common foundation for all secondary schools, telling him that towns would not build and pupils not attend higher Biirgerschulen that offered virtually no opportunity for trans­ fer to a Gymnasium.'7 No further steps were taken, however, during the late fall and early winter. Gossler's relations with Bismarck suffered severe strains during these months over a variety of issues, culminating in his attempt to resign in January 1890 when the Chancellor would not support pay raises for teachers and pastors. In the growing conflict between Wilhelm and Bis­ marck, Gossler generally lined up with the Kaiser in favor of retaining the Kartell majority in the Reichstag. Yet Wilhelm's continuing insinuations that the schools under his adminis­ tration had failed in their moral and patriotic tasks left Gossler in an awkward position; in January he complained bitterly to Herbert von Bismarck about his treatment by the Kaiser and suggested that he certainly did not expect to remain in office much longer.'8 These political matters did not produce any change in Goss­ ler's basic policy toward the secondary schools. In a circular to the Provincial School Authorities about schoolboy suicides, he recited yet again the familiar charges about overly ambi­ tious parents and unqualified pupils being the cause of most >7 COIR 18 (1890):190-191,315-316; Mitteilungen des Verems furSehulreform, no. 2 (1889):5-14. '· Rohl, "Disintegration of the Kartell," pp. 77-78, 81-83; Walter Bussmann, ed., Staatssekretar Graf Herbert von Bismarck (Gottingen, 1964), pp. 556-558; Waldersee, Denkwurdtgkeiten, 1:98; G. von Eppstein, Furst Btsmarcks Entlassung (Berlin, 1920), p. 132. A'lother comment by the Kaiser that implicitly condemned the Gymnasium under Gossler's administration, dating from December 1889, is reported in Schmeding, Entwtcklung des reahsttschen hoheren Schulwesensy p. 136.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

problems in the Gymnasien. The only reform that he instituted in the nine months following the Cabinet Order involved the training of secondary teachers: on 19 January 1890, he sub­ mitted a budget request to the legislature for the establishment of pedagogical seminars at selected secondary schools, where six to eight prospective teachers could receive a better intro­ duction to their future craft than in the poorly supervised practice year.'? The oversupply of teachers made such an ex­ tension of the time devoted to pedagogical training both pos­ sible and desirable. A letter from Minister of War Verdy on 2 February, which reported on plans to reform the cadet academies in accordance with the Kaiser's Cabinet Order, upset Gossler's efforts to minimize the effects of Wilhelm's intervention in educational affairs. Verdy proposed the elimination of ancient history from the lower grades; Gossler objected, insisting this material was "indispensable preparation for entering the world of German Bildung." Undeterred, on 13 February Verdy obtained Wil­ helm's presumably ready consent to a decree ordering adop­ tion of the proposals. Although this decree did not mention fighting socialism in the schools—an understandable omission for institutions attended by those planning to be Prussian officers—it did reflect the Cabinet Order quite closely. German would be the core of the curriculum, supported by increased attention to modern German history and an ethically oriented religious instruction. The cadet academies would strive to bal­ ance the mental, physical, and moral elements of education, avoiding excessive academic demands. The basic structure of the Realgymnasium would remain, but the decree contained not a word about the pedagogical role of Latin.40 Even if the » Centralblatt, 1890, p. 189; SB, XVII:2a, Drucksache 22. One reason for establishing this pedagogical training at the Gymnasien rather than the uni­ versities was the continuing belief that the university should not provide practical training. 40 Verdy to Gossler, 2 February, and Gossler to Verdy, 10 February 1890, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. I; RA, 13 and 15 February 1890. The decree is published in Klaussmann, Kaiserreden, pp. 277-

THE KAISER INTERVENES

cadet academies, as part of the army, were not subject to the Ministry of Education, the stark contrast between this decree and the eloquent defense of classical Bildung that Gossler had made on 6 March 1889 was painfully obvious to all: except for its neglect of a common foundation, the decree could almost have been written by the Executive Committee for German School Reform. This reform of the cadet academies came directly on the heels of the Kaiser's famous decrees on the social question, at a time when rumors of a rift between Wilhelm and Bismarck were beginning to spread. For many Germans, it certainly reinforced the sense that 1890 would mark a breakthrough to a new, forward-looking era. School reformers of all shades rejoiced; in the House of Deputies, the Free Conservative ZedIitz-Neukirch spoke of the Kaiser's "words of salvation." At the moment when Julius Langbehn's Rembrandt as Educator was sweeping the country, hopes and fears for a general school reform under the young Kaiser's leadership received an ad­ ditional impulse from Paul Gussfeldt's article "The Education of German Youth," then appearing in the Deutsche Rund­ schau, the drafts of which Wilhelm was rumored to have read and approved.41 Wilhelm certainly appears to have been ready to move be­ yond the restricted changes recommended in the Cabinet Or­ der to a full-scale reform of secondary education. He had discussed such reforms with Hinzpeter, Giissfeldt, and Court Chaplain Frommel "until nearly midnight" on 31 January, according to one of his wife's ladies-in-waiting. On 13 Feb­ ruary, he had signed the decree for the cadet academies, and 279. Manfred Messerschmidt did not perceive the connection between the Cabinet Order and the reform of the cadet academies: see his "Mihtar und Schule in der wilhelmimschen Zeit," Mtlitargeschichtltche Mtttetlungen 23 (1978):56. «' SB, XVII:2, p. 780 (18 March 1890); Mtttetlungen des Verems fur Sehulreform, no. 4 (1890):36; DndS 1 (1890):541; COIR 18 (1890):316. The Kaiser's famous decrees on the social question, issued without Bismarck's countersignature, had appeared in the RA, 5 February 1890.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

five days later dined with Konrad Schottmiiller; Bismarck even complained on 18 February about Schottmiiller's growing in­ fluence.41 After Wilhelm had met with Gossler for forty-five minutes on 19 February, the official Reichs-Anzeiger on the following day reprinted an article from another newspaper that expressed the hope that the new guidelines for the military schools would soon be extended to encompass all Prussian secondary schools. Two days later, Count Paul Yorck von Wartenburg, whose interest in educational affairs and position in the House of Lords make it possible that he possessed inside information, informed Wilhelm Dilthey that "the Kaiser is pushing forward on school reform."-" Encouraged by the ar­ ticle in the Reichs-Anzeiger, Friedrich Lange and Theodor Peters attempted to remedy their failure to approach the Kaiser in 1888, asking Hermann von Lucanus to present their ideas to Wilhelm; Lucanus replied on 6 March that he had done so, in striking contrast to his aiding Gossler in keeping the Realschulmanner away from the Kaiser a year earlier.44 The decree reforming the cadet academies also produced a remarkable, and little known, response by Bismarck. On 16 March 1890, the day after the Kaiser had made it clear that he wanted Bismarck to resign, the Chancellor wrote a letter to Wilhelm urging him to extend his reforming efforts to all the secondary schools.4' Bismarck's major concern continued •" Mathilde von Keller, 40 Jahre im Dienst der Kaiserm (Leipzig, 1935), p. 117; Julius Heyderhoff and Paul Wentzcke, eds., Deutscher Liberalismus im Zeitalter Bismarcks (2 vols.; Berlin, 192.6), 2:554. Schottmiiller returned to Rome shortly thereafter and did not see Wilhelm again before the German military attache in Rome remarked on π July that the Kaiser valued Schott­ miiller's views on education: Alfred Graf von Waldersee, Aus dem Briefwechsel des Generalfeldmarschalls Alfred Grafen vonWaldersee, ed. Heinrich Otto Meisner (Berlin and Leipzig, 1928), p. 391. For a sense of Chaplain Frommel's views, see chapter 7, p. 219 of this book. « RA, 19 and 20 February 1890;Sigrid von der Schulenburg, ed., Briefwechsel zwischen Wilhelm Dtlthey und dem Grafen Paul Yorck von Wartenburg, 1877-1897 (Halle, 1923), p. 99. « Lange and Peters to Lucanus, 22 February 1890, and Lucanus's reply of 6 March, in ZStA-II, Geheimes Zivilkabinett, 2.2.1, no. 22307. «' Bismarck to the Kaiser, 16 March 1890, in ibid. This letter was first

THE KAISER INTERVENES

to be the dangers of educating pupils beyond their social sta­ tion and thus creating an academic proletariat. He called on Wilhelm to take steps to prevent the founding of new sec­ ondary schools and to reduce the current population of the schools through higher fees. Suggesting a consultation on these issues with Gossler, whom Bismarck knew to share these views, the Chancellor noted that the absence of statutory regulation of secondary education would make reform by decree quite easy. The Kaiser's marginal comments on this letter, dated 17 March, show his complete agreement with the opinions of the man he was in the process of dismissing; his only addition was a remark about the great number of pupils who were trying to obtain the one-year-volunteer privilege. Yet even before Bismarck's letter, Gossler, who seemingly faced the choice between resignation and submission to Wilhelm's plans for the Gymnasium, had taken a step to insure his own survival and that of his views on the classical lan­ guages. On 13 March, Gossler had asked Wilhelm to receive him for a discussion of "matters regarding the so-called school reform"; when they met the next day, he gained Wilhelm's consent to the convening of a commission of inquiry to study the problems of secondary education. Gossler announced this decision to an almost empty House of Deputies on 18 March, the day that Bismarck submitted his resignation. Mentioning the existence of the Cabinet Order publicly for the first time, he said that he had urged Wilhelm to call a conference because the "current literary confusion" had failed to clarify the tech­ nical questions of school reform. Bringing those he called "the major adversaries" together in an "animated verbal struggle" would, he hoped, produce "certain unifying themes." Gossler repeated this justification of holding a conference when he summarized the steps taken to carry out the Cabinet Order for a Crown Council session on 19 April, almost a year after Wilhelm's original initiative. On both occasions, he stressed published from a copy found in Friedrich Althoff's papers by Balschun in his inaccessible, "Zum schulpolitischen Kampf," unpaginated appendix. Balschun did not comment on the significance of the date.

(19Z)

THE KAISER INTERVENES

the necessity of easing the impact of the one-year-volunteer privilege on the schools.4i Why should Gossler have proposed precisely the type of school conference that he had rejected a year earlier when the Mass Petition had urged such an inquiry? Holding a confer­ ence contradicted Bismarck's recommendation to proceed rap­ idly by means of decrees, and it certainly ran counter to Wilhelm's own impulsive temperament; the Kaiser would later complain that he could make no progress in school reform because Gossler wanted discussions "with innumerable peo­ ple."47 Negotiations with the Ministry of War about changing the requirements for the one-year-volunteer privilege did not necessitate a conference; nor did fulfilling the Cabinet Order, because Gossler had possessed recommendations approved by all concerned since the previous August. The "literary con­ fusion" he referred to was no more severe in March 1890 than it had been at the time of the Mass Petition and the Heidelberg Declaration; in any event, the myriad of proposals for restructuring the schools during the 1880s had not caused his Ministry to waver from a fairly consistent policy since the curricula of 1882. Calling a school conference makes sense only if Gossler saw it as a means to buttress his own resistance to Wilhelm's heretical wishes while appearing to comply with his desire for DhG 2 (1891):1-2. 66 Professors' declarations scattered in ZStA-II KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, 1 Gen. z, no. 115, vols. I and II, and no. 115, adhib. b, vol. I; most were published in DhG 1 (1890). I found no number of signatures for the uni­ versities of Erlangen and Rostock, no declarations from Heidelberg, Kiel, Munich, Wurzburg, Freiburg, or Giessen.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

The declaration was circulated to all professors of science and medicine in Germany. Within two weeks, they obtained 414 signatures, a clear majority of those sought.67 Inspired by this "Ludwig Petition," some professors at Prussia's three tech­ nical institutes issued a similar condemnation of the Gym­ nasium on ι December.68 An astounding conglomeration of individuals and organi­ zations bombarded Gossler with requests that their special interests be discussed at the conference, which took on for the public the image of a possible panacea for all long-frus­ trated hopes in the cultural field. In addition to many groups of teachers interested in their subjects or their status, bodies as varied as the Pomeranian Provincial Synod, the Association for Lower-Case Latinic Handwriting, and the Stenography Association wanted to be heard, as the first year after Bis­ marck's departure brought new hopes to all sorts of "reform­ ers." The Silesian Trade Association, one of the few industrial groups to make special pronouncements in anticipation of the conference, called for the establishment of a modern common foundation that would lead more pupils to intermediate tech­ nical schools.69 Of the broadest implications was a request from the newly founded Women's Welfare Association—an­ other offshoot of Konrad Kuster's German Academic Union— that secondary education for girls also be included in the agenda; a marginal note on this petition by an official in the Ministry of Education says, "This of course deserves no an­ swer."70 Gossler finally mailed the invitations to the conference on 67 Wilhelm Ostwald, Lebenshnten (3 vols.; Berlin, 1927), 2:108-110. Ostwald confuses the Heidelberg Declaration of 1888 with the professors' state­ ments in 1890, but evidence in the text proves that he is referring to the latter. 6 ' P A 33 (1891):137-138. " Petitions scattered in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vols. I and II, and no. 115, adhib. b, vol. I. 7° I believe that the guilty scribbler on the petition from the Verein Frauenwohl was Karl Schneider, who was responsible for the higher girls' schools as well as the elementary schools.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

31 October; only Robert Koch declined to participate.71 De­ spite efforts to keep the names secret, they gradually leaked to the public, and as they did the reformers' optimism turned to disillusionment. The Volkszeitung said that such a body would produce only a "backward reform"; the National-Zeitung asked, "Where are the trustees of the Realgymnasium?"71 The one-sided composition of the conference so upset the Realschulmanner that they considered having their repre­ sentatives boycott the deliberations; they did not because Paul­ sen insisted that they had been invited as individuals. Lange and Peters demanded that Gossler explain the failure to invite any member of the School Reform Association; the answer that Schenckendorff was their representative came only two weeks later. Their immediate protest that he did not belong to their organization went unanswered, so Lange made public all his correspondence with Gossler and included it in a direct address to the Kaiser that he and Peters made after the con­ ference began.73 In another eleventh-hour maneuver, Friedrich von Bodelschwingh, whom Gossler had invited despite their disa­ greements the year before,74 attempted to direct the Kaiser's interest toward improving religious instruction in the second­ ary schools. Worried that only three Protestant clerics—Frommel, Abbot Uhlhorn, and himself—were to attend the school conference, Bodelschwingh sent a pamphlet written especially for the occasion to his friend Baron von Mirbach, Hofmar71 The pathologist Robert Koch had recently been embarrassed by being forced to reveal prematurely some research on a cure for tuberculosis because the Kaiser, who had learned of the work from Gossler, had divulged it. Koch's refusal to attend the conference, although couched in terms of the demands of his research, presumably stemmed from this affair. See Marie Radziwill, Lettres de la Prmcesse Radztwtll au Generate de Robtlant (4 vols.; Bologna and Pans, 1933), 1:45, 49. 71 Volkszettung, 18 November 1890; Nattonal-Zeitung, 27 November. 71Paulsen, Autobiography, pp. 339-340; ZfR 3 (1891):1-2; Lange and Peters to the Kaiser, 6 December 1890, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. II. 7< See n. 24 in this chapter.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

schall to the Kaiserin, hoping to reach Wilhelm through his wife. The effort did not succeed before the opening session, however, and the Kaiser's speech on the first day contained no reference to religion.7' In the final days before the carefully planned conference opened, Gossler suffered several unwelcome surprises. On 25 November, he heard from Hinzpeter that the Kaiser wanted much more substantial reductions in hours for Greek and Latin than had been discussed at the planning meeting on 23 October. Hinzpeter also said that Wilhelm intended to par­ ticipate in a session of the conference; Lucanus then informed Gossler that Wilhelm would attend on the opening day. Afraid that Schottmiiller's enthusiasm for a common foundation might have infected the Kaiser, Gossler hastily shuffled the schedule to allow Gustav Uhlig to deliver his negative judgments about this type of structure in Wilhelm's presence.76 On 3 December, the day before the conference opened, Gossler received another shock. The new Minister of War, General von Kaltenborn, sent him a six-page printed memo­ randum, "The Army and the Secondary Schools," with copies intended for all the delegates to the conference. In contrast to the liberal professions, the military in Imperial Germany had never viewed a classical education at a Gymnasium as a sine qua non of an officer's status; although it preferred that of­ ficers come from the select social circles that frequented the " The pamphlet was Albrecht Schoeler, Die religiose Erziebung unserer gebtldeten Jugend und der Religionsunterricht auf unseren Gymnasten (id ed.; Gutersloh, 1891); Bodelschwmgh to Mirbach, 27 November 1890, in Friednch von Bodelschwingh, Briefwechsel, part V: 1890 bis 1891, ed. Alfred Adam (Bethel bei Bielefeld, 1968), pp. 96—97. A letter from Bodelschwingh to Schoeler, 27 January 1891, says that the Kaiserin had not yet given the pamphlet to Wilhelm: Bodelschwingh Papers, no. 81. " Hinzpeter to Gossler, undated but presented 25 November 1890, and Lucanus to Gossler, 29 November, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. II; Uhlig's reminiscences in DhG 24 (1913):153. For another expression of Wilhelm's interest in school reform at this time, and for criticism of Giissfeldt by Hinzpeter, see Ludwig Raschdau, Unter Bismarck und Caprwi (Berlin, 1939), pp. 192-193.

THE KAISER INTERVENES

classical schools, it had no particular attachment to Greek and Latin, as the choice of the curriculum of the Realgymnasium for the cadet academies demonstrates. The memorandum clearly reflected this point of view, arguing that "youth today requires more than ever before to be educated to understand the pres­ ent and its tasks, the position and importance of our father­ land among the modern civilized nations." To achieve this goal, the memorandum recommended a three-year common foundation for all secondary schools in which French would be the only foreign language taught; it also echoed "the large number of prominent experts" who believed that graduates of the Realgymnasium, and thus the cadet academies, were fully qualified for the study of law and medicine. Without commenting too harshly on the fitness of the average one-year volunteer, the memorandum did suggest that the schools of­ fered the best opportunity for improving the physical condi­ tion of German youth. It did support Gossler's efforts to ex­ pand the higher Biirgerschulen, arguing as he had in 1882 that other rights beyond the one-year-volunteer privilege would have to be granted to their graduates; but the memorandum also repeated Verdy's support for an examination after Obersekunda at the nine-year schools for the military privi­ lege, an idea that had not found very strong support in the Ministry of Education.77 Gossler's elaborate ruse thus threatened to collapse. The Kaiser and the army may have been "dilettantes" in matters of secondary education, but their combined opinions could hardly be ignored even by the staunchest defenders of the traditional ways. Wilhelm Dilthey's report would appear to be correct: as the conference approached, Gossler—who was also facing serious opposition in the House of Deputies to the latest elementary school law—expected from day to day to be dismissed.78 77 Memorandum "Armee und hohere Schule" in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. II. See also Messerschmidt, "Militarund Schule," passim. 78 Schulenburg, Briefwechsel Dilthey—Yorck, p. 114.

SEVEN

THE SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890 A queer epoch was that of this School Conference, and some queer fish were called upon to take part in it. Sidney Whitman There was little to praise in the school conference, except that like all earthly things, it came to an end. Friedrich Paulsen'

THE CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

T

HE Prussian school conference of 1890 convened on 4 December in an atmosphere of apprehension on all sides. Educational conservatives feared that the conference would produce further surrender to the "demands of the pres­ ent," either in the form of additional dilution of the ancient languages in the Gymnasium or through the opening of more sections of the universities to Realgymnasium graduates. Re­ formers of all shades, who had been optimistic that the con­ ference would move in the direction set by the Kaiser's decree on reforming the cadet academies, now doubted that any sig­ nificant changes could be expected from the body that Gossler had assembled. The Minister of Education himself, seemingly undecided about several of the most important points on the agenda, also did not know whether or not the Kaiser and the army might, through advocating a common foundation and extended privileges for the Realgymnasien, undercut a decade of his efforts to solve the problems of the "ballast" and the overcrowded professions. Gossler opened the first session of the conference with a ' Sidney Whitman, German Memories (London, 1912), p. 114; Paulsen, Tonnies—Paulsen Briefwechsel, p. 291.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

short speech in which he noted how the Kaiser's Cabinet Order, which had finally been made public, had fallen in the midst of an already powerful movement for secondary school reform, the sources of which he quickly traced. Wilhelm, seated on a raised platform with Hinzpeter, Schottmiiller, and Count Hugo Douglas,2 but not Giissfeldt, then rose to greet the del­ egates and thank the Minister of Education for organizing the meeting. Much to the consternation of those hoping for Gossler's departure from office, and presumably much to Gossler's own surprise, Wilhelm gave his minister a strong vote of con­ fidence, saying that no one was better qualified to bring the deliberations to a satisfactory conclusion.* If Gossler took comfort in these words of praise, his pleasure was extremely short-lived, for Wilhelm then launched into an address that, as had the Cabinet Order nineteen months ear­ lier, harshly condemned many of his minister's policies. There was much speculation at the time about who had composed Wilhelm's remarks, which he did not read from a prepared text; but from what we now know, his comments appear much more clearly to be an outgrowth of his own long-term interests than they did to contemporary observers. That Hinzpeter had no part in preparing the speech is confirmed not only by its many departures from his convictions, but also by his state­ ment that day to the ambassador from Baden, as well as by Wilhelm's comments years later to Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia University.4 A newspaper story that Karl Schnei1 Count Hugo Douglas had made a fortune in potassium mining; Kaiser Friedrich had created him a baron, Wilhelm made him a count. A member of the Free Conservative party, Douglas wrote a pamphlet in 1888 that portrayed Wilhelm as favoring the Kartell parties rather than the extreme right: Was wir von unserem Kaiser hoffen diirfen (Berlin, 1888). He took part in the school conference because of his interest in public health. ' 1890, pp. 67-70; description of the scene in Schmidt-Ott, Erlebtes und Erstrebtes, p. 23. According to the Muttchener Neueste Nachrichten of 6 December 1890, Wilhelm's public praise of Gossler was unprecedented. * Report of Baden's ambassador, 7 December 1890, in Brunkhorst, Einbeziehung der preussisehen Sehule in die Politik, p. 104; Nicholas Murray Butler, Across the Busy Years (2 vols.; New York and London, 1939-1940),

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

der of the Ministry of Education had been involved rests on no evidence.5 Count Waldersee wrote in his diary that Schottmuller had written the speech, which does conform with the latter's close relations with the Kaiser at this time, but there is no concrete proof of this.6 Wilhelm opened his remarks with a bow to the advocates of "purifying" the German language, regretting Gossler's use of the French term "enquete" to describe the proceedings. In another slap at the Minister of Education, he next produced a short list of questions that he had scribbled down because he thought the agenda tended to "schematize" the problems too much. Reaching the body of his speech, Wilhelm delivered a third blow to Gossler, claiming that the Cabinet Order would not have been necessary if the schools had done their job properly. If teachers had led the fight against Social Democ­ racy as they had led the movement for German unification in the 1860s, his own generation would be more aware of the need and duty to uphold the new Reich.7 The schools had failed in their duties, he went on, primarily because they were dominated by philologists interested only in stuffing pupils with facts, and not in building their character or arming them for later life. Wilhelm rejected as no longer valid the traditional view that the mental training provided by the classical languages prepared boys to face all later tasks, which Gossler had expressed so eloquently in the House of Deputies in 1889. According to Wilhelm, the "monastic ed­ ucation of the Middle Ages" could no longer be the standard for modern Germany. German must become the core of the Gymnasium curriculum; the Latin essay should disappear and be replaced by the German as the major criterion for pro2.:71. For another report of Hinzpeter's unhappiness with Wilhelm's speech, see Rohl, Eulenburgs Poltttscbe Korrespondenz, 1:611. 1 Saale Zettung, 10 December 1890. In his memoirs, Schneider does not mention this story and says that he had little to do with the conference: Halbes Jahrhundert, pp. 432-433. 6Waldersee, Denkwurdigketten, 2:164. 7 Wilhelm's entire speech is in 1890, pp. 70-76.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

motion and graduation. According to one report, Wilhelm said that a pupil who wrote a bad German essay deserved twenty-five lashes.8 Turning to the teaching of history, the Kaiser repeated the central theme of the Cabinet Order: unfamiliarity with the development of modern Germany allowed youths to be se­ duced by confused projects for improving the world. In the presence of his German history teacher from Kassel, Theodor Hartwig, Wilhelm bemoaned the fact that when he had been at school the Great Elector was but a hazy figure and the War of Liberation was not even covered. Only with a better grasp of the era of the French Revolution could pupils understand the contemporary world. A major portion of the Kaiser's address dealt with over­ burdening. Claiming that at the Lyceum in Kassel pupils had devoted as much as seven hours a day to homework, Wilhelm insisted that the upper limit of what pupils could bear had already been overstepped. The mental strain and neglect of physical exercise threatened the national defense at a time when he was "looking for soldiers." Noting that eighteen of twenty-one boys in his Gymnasium class had worn glasses, the Kaiser expressed particular concern about the increasing incidence of nearsightedness among schoolboys, something especially dangerous because the French had recently devel­ oped a smokeless gunpowder.9 Rejecting Hinzpeter's belief that pupils' fathers should have no voice in framing educa­ tional policy, Wilhelm said he spoke for all fathers in de­ manding less homework, fewer classes, an easier Abitur ex­ amination, and more exercise. Only under these conditions could the schools attend successfully to their neglected moral tasks. In another remark softened in the published text, he 8 Gurlitt, Der Deutsche und seine Schule,p. 85. This is a secondhand report; Gustav Uhlig disputed its accuracy, but not that the published version had been altered: DhG 17 (1906):67. »This problem of smokeless gunpowder had been mentioned in the army's memorandum; see n. 77 to chapter 6.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

claimed that many teachers were not sufficiently well-bred to be able to serve as moral examples for their pupils.10 Wilhelm also turned his attention to the overproduction of scholars, speaking of an Abiturientenproletariat and "hunger candidates"; a comment about "press rascals" appeared in the published version of his speech as "journalists who pose a threat to us."11 To control the number of graduates, WiIhelm promised to approve no new Gymnasium that was not ab­ solutely necessary. For the "ballast" interested only in ob­ taining the one-year-volunteer privilege, he now overruled the army and called for an examination after six years to make all the schools equal in this regard. In the most surprising and most radical proposal in his speech, Wilhelm then echoed Treitschke and the Mommsen brothers in calling for the re­ tention of only the Gymnasium and a purely modern second­ ary school, but "no Realgymnasium." "The Realgymnasium is neither fish nor fowl, one receives only Halbbildung there and leaves only half prepared for life." He accompanied this statement with a vigorous gesture that left no doubt of his earnestness." This unexpected attack on the Realgymnasium contradicted much of what Wilhelm had had to say about school reform since 1885. It was also diametrically opposed to the plea for opening medical and legal studies to Realgymnasium gradu­ ates made by the Ministry of War. There is no evidence that Hinzpeter, Schottmuller, or Gossler had suggested this dec­ laration, or even approved of it. Only one source offers an explanation of the Kaiser's sudden opposition to the Real­ gymnasium: Wilhelm Dilthey, not a delegate to the conference but with friends in the Ministry of Education and among the participants, wrote that Hermann Lucanus, chief of the Kai­ ser's Civil Cabinet, was responsible for the about-face. Lu'0Radziwill, Lettres, i :jo . " The expression "Pressbengeln" is reported by Waldersee, DenkuHirdigkeiten, 2:164; Radziwill, Lettres,1:50; and Rohl, Eulenburgs Politische Korrespondenz, 1:613. 11 Marcks, Oskar Jaeger, p. 165.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

canus, who had served in the religious affairs department under Gossler until 1888, and whom Dilthey called "an old ally of humanistic studies," apparently convinced Wilhelm that his wishes about improved instruction in German and history and greater attention to physical fitness could be re­ alized within a reformed Gymnasium, while the "boundless covetousness" of the Realschulmanner could be eliminated by simply eliminating the Realgymnasium.1' One can imagine Wilhelm seeing such a step as a means to ease the threat of further overcrowding of the professions; but his speech ig­ nored the question of where the pupils from the Realgymnasien would go. He certainly knew that his speech had at­ tacked many of Gossler's beliefs: as he was leaving the session, he was overheard saying to Stauder, "You must bring the Minister along."1'1 All witnesses report the excitement created by Wilhelm's speech, both inside and outside of Germany. A group of Rus­ sian schoolboys even scrawled "Cheers for Kaiser Wilhelm!" on the blackboard, a highly unusual enthusiasm for the House of Hohenzollern.1' Very quickly, however, the attitude of the German press, if not of the public at large, turned sharply critical. Few newspapers failed to note the discrepancy be­ tween Wilhelm's expressed confidence in Gossler and his con­ demnation of the minister's policies. Most also questioned the failure of the Reichs-Anzetger to print the entire speech on the evening of 4 December, as well as its admission that the published text was an inexact rendition of the Kaiser's words. •' Schulenburg, Briefwechsel Dilthey—Yorck, p. 114; on the army's sur­ prise at Wilhelm's hostility to the Realgymnasium, see Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrtert Unterriehts (2d ed.), 1:592.. Lucanus may have been working for Gossler in convincing Wilhelm to speak out against the Realgymnasium, but I found no evidence of such collusion and, as argued in chapter 6, do not believe that Gossler wanted the conference to move toward elimination of the semiclassical schools. *4 Radziwill, Lettres, 1:51. '> Copy of the report of the military plenipotentiary in St. Petersburg, 14 December 1890, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, adhib. c, vol. I.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

Newspapers of all political persuasions took offense at Wilhelm's remarks about journalists, even before the "press ras­ cals" comment became known. Several reporters and some officials in the Ministry of Education expressed surprise that neither Gossler nor Lucanus, but instead Hinzpeter and Hartwig, edited the speech for publication.16 Almost no portion of the address escaped some criticism. Wilhelm's assertion that the secondary schools had been bear­ ers of the idea of unification in the 1860s ignored the fact that the governments of the German states had frowned upon the preaching of German unity in those years. His complaints about the neglect of German history at Kassel drew the correct reply that he had left school several months early for the celebration of his majority on 27 January 1877, in the middle of the course in German history taught in Oberprima. To avoid accusing the Kaiser of exaggerating the workload at Kassel, several newspapers suggested that it must have been an unusual school. The press generally gave less attention to the proposed elimination of the Realgymnasium than to the attacks 011 the classical schools. However, a few articles did point out that the likely effect of this step would be the pro­ duction of more "young Greeks and Romans," not the fewer that Wilhelm claimed to want.17 Many political conservatives lamented the young Kaiser's descent into the kind of partisan conflict from which monarchs should remain aloof. By separating himself so markedly from the views of his responsible minister and relying so heavily on his own experiences, Wilhelm had left himself open to a regrettable spate of direct criticism. As Robert Bosse, a future Minister of Education, wrote in his diary about Wilhelm's speech, "In the school inquiry, he talked too much."18 16RA, 4 December 1890; National-Zeitung, Westphalische Merkur, and Kolmsche Zeitung of 5 December; Freisinnige Zeitung, 12 December; Brunkhorst, Einbeziehung der preussisehen Sehule in die Politik, p. 104. 17 Hannoversehe Courier, 7 December; Deutsches Tageblatt, 9 December; NPZ and Danziger Zeitung, 10 December; Borsen-Zeitung and Vossisehe Zeitung, 6 December. 18 Brunkhorst, Einbeziehung der preussisehen Sehule in die Politik, p. 103;

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

The only other speaker on the first day of the conference was Gustav Uhlig, who delivered his negative views about a common foundation in the Kaiser's presence. Before the sec­ ond session, Gossler integrated Wilhelm's series of ques­ tions—which asked in general terms about school hygiene, lessening overburdening, easing examinations and reducing the material to be covered in class, new curricula and teaching methods, and measures needed to insure that new regulations were carried out—into the agenda.1» These questions had little effect on the course of the deliberations, but Wilhelm's de­ mands for the elimination of the Realgymnasium and of the Latin essay at the Gymnasium obviously did give an unex­ pected direction to some of the discussions. It was certainly ironic that many delegates whom Gossler had chosen to help fend off the Kaiser's expected support for the semiclassical schools found themselves suddenly backing Wilhelm in his attack on the Halbbildung of the Realgymnasium. Following the debates in detail is not necessary because virtually all the delegates relied on arguments they had ad­ vanced previously. Whether it was Uhlig rejecting a common foundation, Rudolf Virchow complaining about Gymnasium graduates who knew too little science, Emil von Schenckendorff arguing that six-year modern schools would never at­ tract many pupils, Adolf Tobler regretting the right of Real­ gymnasium graduates to study modern languages, Oskar Jaeger speaking of the Gymnasium as existing primarily for the frac­ tion of its pupils who graduated, or Dr. Eduard Graf insisting all physicians should be Gymnasium graduates, little was said that anyone familiar with the debate of the school question during the previous years had not heard many times before. Claims and counterclaims based on conflicting personal ex­ periences often obscured the major problems and principles under consideration. Emil Frommel was not far wrong when he commented on the fourth day, "What has been said here Waldersee, Denkwiirdigkeiten, 1:165; Radziwill, Lettres, 1:52; NPZ, το December; Schlesische Zeitung, 17 December; diary entry of 1 January 1891 in Bosse Papers, vol. 7. " 1890, p. 92.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

so far has only served to make the whole question murkier and foggier than before."10 Yet behind all the verbiage, one can discern certain general trends in the proceedings. The first decision reached by the delegates echoed Wilhelm's assertion that the agenda sche­ matized the issues too much; they concluded that the neat separation of the questions could not be maintained because of the complex interrelationships among the possible reforms. To simplify matters, they postponed voting on resolutions until the first four questions—that is, the types of nine-year schools to exist in the future, the desirability of a common foundation, the possible reduction in hours for the classics and addition of English and more drawing to the Gymnasium (essentially a move toward a comprehensive Gymnasium), and the amount of Latin at the Realgymnasium—had been de­ bated.21 The problem of university and career privileges re­ mained separate, but rested ultimately on the conclusion about the future status of the Realgymnasium. There were several noteworthy developments during the long debate over these four questions, which lasted into the sixth day. Johann Stauder, immediately after saying that of­ ficials from the Ministry of Education would intervene in the discussions only for the purpose of factual clarifications, spoke of a type of common foundation that had not been much discussed in the literature: by making Greek optional from Untertertia through Untersekunda in the Gymnasium, a sixyear common foundation for the Gymnasium and Realgym­ nasium could be created, to be followed by a classical and a purely modern three-year upper cycle. If this was intended to provoke discussion or support, it did not: debate about a common foundation centered on the previous proposals for 10 Ibid., p. 135. The debates take up 700 pages of closely printed text; a much condensed version of the proceedings in English can be found in the Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1889-1890 (Wash­ ington, 1893), pp· 364-387· " 1890, p. 172.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

delaying Latin and establishing a modern foundation for all schools.11 The nonvoting representatives of the other Prussian min­ istries came out much more strongly for reform than Gossler ever had. Hugo Thiel of the Ministry of Agriculture insisted that the two-thirds of Gymnasium graduates who failed to graduate must receive a better preparation for the careers they would eventually enter; he endorsed a modern common foun­ dation for all secondary schools rather than an effort to force the "ballast" out of the Gymnasium. A cadet academy teacher named Rehrmann reiterated the army's support for a common foundation, speaking both of the advantages of later choice and of the desirability of not overburdening nine- to twelveyear-olds with Latin. The spokesman for the Ministry of Com­ merce, Karl Liiders, expressed similar concerns, calling for more extensive training in drawing and obligatory English to aid pupils who entered technical and commercial careers. Both Luders and Rehrmann worried that Wilhelm's proposed elim­ ination of the Realgymnasium would lead to even more serious overcrowding of the classical schools and the professions un­ less there was a substantial increase in privileges obtainable at the Oberrealschulen. Stauder found it necessary to point out that Rehrmann spoke only for the Ministry of War and not for the educational authorities, although Wilhelm Wehrenpfennig later expressed a similar concern about a surge in Gymnasium enrollments if the Realgymnasium were to dis­ appear.1' Yet Wilhelm's plan for preserving only the "pure" types of secondary schools did find much support among the delegates, and not only among the philologists and the members of the Association for a Comprehensive School. Gustav Holzmuller and Heinrich Fiedler, directors of a higher Burgerschule and an Oberrealschule, spoke against the Realgymnasium, as did 11 Ibid., pp. 108-109. Konrad Rethwisch reported that this plan outlined by Stauder was what the Ministry of Education wanted the conference to approve: Lexis, Die Reform, p. 11. I see no basis for saying this. 1890, pp. 112-114, 146—247, 226-229, 317·

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

the industrialist Kaselowsky and the only professor from a technical institute, the architect Hermann Ende.1* The Realschulmanner at the conference faced the awkward choice of either abandoning their convictions or opposing the Kaiser before the eyes of the entire nation. Eduard Schauenburg ad­ mitted that he would prefer not to defend his theses on ex­ panded privileges for Realgymnasium graduates, but felt ob­ ligated to carry out what he had been invited to do. This reticence did not prevent him from criticizing the lack of rep­ resentation at the conference for the patrons of the Realgymnasien, whom he identified as "the most influential and dis­ tinguished industrialists and merchants" of western Prussia. Several other delegates also stressed how unwelcome the pro­ posed measure would be to the towns that had built and sustained the semiclassical schools. Ernst Schlee and Friedrich Paulsen attempted to refute Wilhelm's charge that the Realgymnasium provided an "impure" form of education by ar­ guing that the Gymnasium itself, by teaching French, physics, and mathematics in addition to the classics and history, was not purely "humanistic."1' Paulsen also tried to create an advantage for the Realgymnasium by emphasizing that the choice between saving the Gymnasium's curriculum and preserving its near monopoly over preparation for the universities, which had been post­ poned in 1882, now had to be made. By stressing the threat to Latin and Greek that a comprehensive Gymnasium in­ volved, Paulsen tried to win the arch-conservatives to the side of the Realschulmanner. He failed, even though several con­ servatives were clearly unhappy with Stauder's pronounce­ ment that the Ministry of Education viewed the ancient lan­ guages as the only subjects capable of sustaining the substantial reductions in classroom hours that the Kaiser desired in order to ease overburdening. Dietrich Volkmann, the director of Ibid., pp. 113, 301-302, 338-345, 141-142. *« Ibid., pp. 302, 311, 349, 356, 357, 351.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

Schulpforta, predicted that such cuts would produce "a de­ cline in the mental capacity of our youth in the future"; Her­ mann Kropatscheck commented that he would "rather praise the Latin essay than bury it." Outside the conference room Oskar Jaeger reportedly said that he would bring the Latin essay back in through the side door if the Kaiser succeeded in abolishing it.16 Yet in the context of Wilhelm's attack on the Realgymnasium, these conservatives still failed to see that the Gymnasium's curriculum could be saved only by sacrific­ ing more of the monopoly over preparation for the univer­ sities. The greatest controversy during the debates stemmed from remarks by the unlikely figure of Chaplain Frommel. Echoing the Kaiser's sentiments even more closely than did Schottmuller, whose only speech during the debate of the first four questions centered on overburdening, Frommel delivered a harsh indictment of the many broken and embittered teachers he knew; such men were capable of imparting to pupils only dead factual knowledge, but not Bildung. Frommel believed in the reality of overburdening: the Gymnasium, he said, pro­ duced not humanists, but spiritual and physical cripples. Al­ though he still admired the classical tradition, he insisted that it desperately needed reinvigoration.17 Stauder again intervened in the debate, to deny in Gossler's name the accuracy of this portrait of the schools. Gustav Uhlig answered fire with fire, claiming that those who spoke of overburdening were infected with the bacilli of "generaliza­ tion and exaggeration"; other remarks were later suppressed. Hugo Goering leaped to Frommel's defense, saying that the true infectious agents were "complacency and glossing over of the facts." Only the mediation efforts of Karl Schneider from the ministry, and judicious editing of the transcript of u Ibid., pp. 229, 210, 276, 273; Gurlitt, Der Deutsche und seine Schule, p. 89. Paulsen pointed out how the abolition of the Realgymnasien in AlsaceLorraine had led to a rise in Gymnasium enrollment: 1890, p. 353. " Ibid., pp. 236-239.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

the session, saved Frommel and Uhlig from public embar­ rassment.18 When the voting on the first four questions finally arrived, defenders of the Realgymnasium mustered only eight votes against thirty-five delegates favoring "in principle" only two types of nine-year schools; surprisingly, Tobler voted for re­ tention of the semiclassical school despite his opposition to having its graduates study modern languages. A vague reso­ lution calling for an undefined common foundation won the support of Otto Frick and Hermann Schiller of the Association for a Comprehensive School (who wanted only two years), the Realschulmanner, and most of the Kaiser's unofficial ad­ visors—Douglas, Frommel, Schottmiiller, Giissfeldt, and Goering—but still lost by twenty-eight votes to fifteen. A reduction in total classroom hours passed by show of hands, but the conservatives rejected Stauder's pronouncement and attached an amendment demanding that Latin and Greek should not absorb all the cuts. A majority recommended leaving the de­ cision on obligatory English in the Gymnasium to individual localities and voted to extend drawing instruction in the mid­ dle grades. Although resolutions on increased attention for German language and modern history also passed, they were not as far-reaching as the Kaiser's speech had seemed to de­ mand.1» In the discussions of homework and physical exercise that followed, Giissfeldt and Goering delivered long orations on their pet projects, but both elicited more snickering than sup­ port. A military physician reported that the percentage of unfit one-year volunteers was now only slightly higher than for ordinary conscripts, but repeated the army's concern with nearsightedness among the reserve officers of the future. Emil von Schenckendorff backed his advocacy of games and hand­ icrafts for schoolboys with the assertion, "The German people 18 Ibid., pp. 249, 258—259, 266; Uhlig in DhG 17 (1906):68; Schneider, Halbes Jahrhundert, p. 433; Schmidt-Ott, Erlebtes und Erstrebtes, pp. 2324; Gurlitt, Der Deutsche und seine Schule, pp. 90-91. 1 8 9 0 , pp. 491, 494-495» 384-385. 5°*> 5°5·

(zzo)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

have become nervous." The conference eventually adopted moderate resolutions on increased exercise, controls on home­ work, and improved teaching methods; it rejected restriction of classes to the morning hours. After Hermann Kropatscheck crossed swords with Oskar Bohtz of the Ministry of Education over how much the government could afford to spend on the schools, a majority also voted for a pay raise for teachers, the question Gossler had stricken from the agenda.'0 To simplify the system of privileges, the conference decided that all seven-year schools should be reduced to six. The sixyear modern school would be known as the Realschule rather than the higher Biirgerschule, and thus would stand in the same relation to the Oberrealschule as the Progymnasium and Realprogymnasium did to the other nine-year schools. Fol­ lowing Wilhelm's lead, the delegates passed with surprising ease the new examination after six years for the one-year volunteer privilege, making all schools equal in this regard. Everyone agreed that this new test should allow an easing of requirements on the Abitur examination, but no one proposed eliminating the latter. Stauder demonstrated a conciliatory attitude toward the Kaiser in saying that although high grades in some fields could compensate for low ones in others on the Abitur, there should be no compensation for an inadequate German essay; but he also stressed that in the absence of the Latin essay, special weight would be attached to translations from German into Latin.'1 Bodelschwingh raised his old com­ plaints about the neglect of religion at the Gymnasium and demanded a more rigorous examination in this subject to produce the necessary attention among pupils. Ernst Hopfner of the ministry insisted, however, as Gossler had the year before, that Bodelschwingh had the facts wrong. His attempt to introduce a more difficult examination and a later effort to mandate more class time for religion both failed.31 '"Ibid., pp. 448-456, 475-478. 441-445. 461. 518, 554-555. «35. 629. " Ibid., pp. 384-385. 397. 584-585, 589-590. 574. 665. 31

Ibid., pp. 641-643, 652; letters from Bodelschwingh to a Professor Ranke,

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

The Kaiser followed the progress of the conference closely. After a two-day absence from Berlin, he received a report on the deliberations from Schottmiiller on 7 December; that eve­ ning he dined with Hinzpeter, Schottmiiller, Giissfeldt, and Georg Schulze, the director of the French Gymnasium in Ber­ lin. From this dinner emerged remarks by Hinzpeter at the next conference session that were aimed at softening the effects of the Kaiser's description of his school days: the former tutor said that the Kassel Lyceum had provided its royal pupil with an excellent education, including developing a historical Welt­ anschauung.» On the evening of 10 December, Gossler com­ plained to Waldersee about Schottmiiller's influence and his own uncertain status with the Kaiser, yet two days later he invited Wilhelm to appear again at the final session for the debate over privileges. At a dinner for the Grand Duke of Luxemburg on 14 December, Wilhelm informed Gossler that not only would he attend, but he wanted to speak again.'* The evening preceding the final session witnessed a great deal of maneuvering behind the scenes. Gustav Holzmiiller and Adolf Matthias spent long hours in an upper room of the Spatenbrau tavern with Wilhelm Wehrenpfennig from the ministry in an effort to refine the wording of a resolution that called for "as equal a valuation as possible of modern and humanistic Bildung" in the revised system of privileges, with­ out either openly opposing Wilhelm's wishes regarding the Realgymnasium or specifying what rights the Oberrealschule should receive. Gossler suggested to Paulsen that he withdraw from the roster of speakers on the last day because the fate of the semiclassical schools was already sealed, but relented when Paulsen argued that "to refuse a condemned man a last word was bound to produce a bad impression." In a final 8 January 1891, and to Albrecht Schoeler, 27 January, in BodeIschwingh Papers, no. 81. " National-Zeitung, 8 December 1890; 1890, p. 251. »«Waldersee, Denkwiirdigkeiten, 1:164, 166; Gossler to the Kaiser, 12 December 1890, in ZStA-II, Geheimes Zivilkabinett, 2.1.1, no. 22307; 1890, pp. 348, 577.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

effort to place religion at the center of any school reform, Bodelschwingh succeeded in having Lucanus tell Wilhelm that many people had regretted the neglect of religion in his open­ ing address." Wilhelm Schrader opened the final session with a defense of the conservatives' revised theses on privileges. These in­ cluded granting graduates of the Oberrealschulen all the rights held previously by Realgymnasium graduates, except the longdisputed right to study modern languages at the universities. Schrader also proposed requiring Gymnasium graduates to pass special examinations in the sciences for admission to the technical institutes, a plan designed to meet the objections of the professors at these institutions.'6 Friedrich Paulsen then took the floor to plead for the Realgymnasium: In my address I endeavored to demonstrate the indispensability of this type of secondary school in the shortest and most impressive way possible by pointing out that there were professions which could do without Greek, but not without Latin. The military profession was a case in point, as was evidenced by the fact that the curriculum of the Realgymnasium had been adopted for the training of offi­ cers in the military academies. I had been specially warned not to allude to this point, as the Emperor was extremely touchy about it; but I did not think fit to forego my strongest argument. The Emperor, who was sitting at the same table a few feet away from me, kept his cold blue eyes fixed on me in an almost threatening manner.37 " Adolf Matthias, Erlebtes und Zukunftsfragen aus Schulverwaltung, Unterricht undErziehung (Berlin, 1913), p. 18; Paulsen, Autobiography, p. 340; Bodelschwingh to Schoeler, 27 January 1891, in Bodelschwingh Papers, no. 81. >61890, pp. 728-729, 787-788.1 assume that Gossler or Stauder helped draft these final theses, which made the disappearance of the ReaIgymnasium at least feasible. " Paulsen, Autobiography, p. 341.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

Paulsen's strategy failed again, however, when Eduard Zeller reminded the conference that Frederick the Great had not included Greek in the curriculum of his military schools but had considered it a prerequisite for university studies.'8 No matter how irrelevant this fact was for the situation existing in Prussia in 1890, such a comparison to his illustrious ances­ tor could have only strengthened Wilhelm's recently discov­ ered hostility to the Realgymnasium. The delegates themselves were not impressed by Paulsen's plea, and voted for Schrader's proposals by a tally of thirty-nine to four; Schenckendorff, Virchow, Tobler, and Helmholtz, who had voted against the resolution for only two types of school, did not vote for the Realgymnasium's privileges in the Kaiser's presence. In the rush to conclude the meeting, the vague Matthias-Holzmuller resolution also passed by a show of hands.39 At a breakfast preceding this final session, Wilhelm had expressed his satisfaction with the results of the conference, and his absolutist leanings, by presenting Gossler with a royal portrait inscribed, "Sic volo, sic jubeo! "4° Taking the floor after the voting ended, Wilhelm repeated his pleasure with the commission's work, apparently unaware of the barely muffled resistance to abolishing the Latin essay. Several sentences about religion indicated that he had received Bodelschwingh's mes­ sage but had not grasped its motivation. In response to Paul­ sen, the Kaiser insisted that the cadet academies were some­ thing unique under his own control, not related to the work of the conference.41 Turning to a few more general remarks, the Kaiser said that the success of the Hohenzollerns had always rested on their ability to perceive the trend of the times; in another remark deleted from the published protocol, he added that Friedrich >' 1890, p. 758. See also Schulenburg, Briefwechsel Dilthey—Yorck, pp. 114-115. » 1890, pp. 765—766. The four diehards were Paulsen, Schauenburg, Schlee, and Heinrich Bertram, a municipal school official from Berlin. Paulsen, Autobiography, p. 340; Radziwill, Lettres, 1:52. «• For this and the following, 1890, pp. 769-772.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

Wilhelm IV had lacked this talent/* As for himself, Wilhelm claimed to have grasped "the new spirit of the expiring cen­ tury"; in education as in social reform, he would make the new departures that the times demanded, rather than waiting to be forced to do so twenty years later. Lucanus then read a Cabinet Order directed to Gossler that contained another affront to the Minister of Education, calling on him to estab­ lish a committee independent of his ministry to review the work of the conference; new curricula should be ready by 1 April 189Z. Recognizing the increased demands that the new regulations would make on teachers, Wilhelm's Order prom­ ised an improvement in their pay and status, a concern prob­ ably stemming from Hinzpeter.43 Archbishop Kopp expressed the thanks of the delegates for the Kaiser's interest, and the conference adjourned. If, as one delegate to the conference suggested, the Kaiser's participation had helped to cut the Gordian knot of possible reforms, it had also contributed to the adoption of recom­ mendations that appalled the Realschulmanner, frustrated the School Reform Association, and dismayed many friends of the traditional Gymnasium. About the only unqualified sup­ porters of the conference's resolutions were the Association for a Comprehensive School, which disbanded early in 1891, and Dr. Graf of the Physicians' Association, who had seen the threat of Ungebildeten becoming physicians removed while steps were also taken to ease overburdening.44 Progress had apparently been made toward giving German studies a greater role in secondary education; a general consensus had also emerged that the "ballast" required a more appropriate and self-contained education in the six years of schooling that led to the one-year-volunteer privilege. Yet it was up to Gossler, Radziwill, Lettres, 1: 5 3 ; Paulsen, Tonnies—Paulsen Briefwechsel, p. 1 9 0 . According to Wilhelm's French tutor at Kassel, Hinzpeter taught this view of the Hohenzollerns: Ayme, Guillaume II, p. i z 2 . 4 ' 1890, pp. 771-773« Padagogische Studien 1 1 ( 1 8 9 1 ) : 1 5 2 - 1 5 5 ; SB, XVII:4, p. 7 4 1 (8 March 1892).

(2.2.5)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF

1890

who understandably was, as Archbishop Kopp described him, "no longer able to distinguish friend from foe,"4' to try to win for the modern schools the privileges necessary to attract the "ballast" and the pupils from the Realgymnasien. This was precisely what he had been unable to do in the 1880s. If he failed again, the result would be, as Rehrmann, Luders, and Paulsen had warned, a serious aggravation of the prob­ lems of both the "ballast" in the Gymnasium and the over­ crowded professions, the issues that Gossler and Bismarck had long considered the most pressing facing the secondary schools.46 AFTERMATH: TO THE CURRICULA OF 1892

The resolutions of the Prussian school conference of 1890 were only recommendations, although the public fanfare sur­ rounding the deliberations and Wilhelm's active participation and approval lent them an aura of much greater authority than would typically have been the case for such a commission of inquiry. Yet the transition from the resolutions to the new regulations and curricula issued in 1892 proved to be almost as complicated as the events leading up to the conference. The interest groups and lobbying organizations, the other Prussian ministries, and many cities and towns challenged the decisions of the conference and the desires of the Kaiser. Gossler himself did not survive long enough as Minister of Education to see the fruits of his school conference; his successor, not person­ ally associated with the resolutions, retreated from some of them in the face of public pressures and as a result of second thoughts within the Ministry of Education itself. « Letter from Kopp, 26 December 1890, in Schlozer, Letzte romtsche Brtefe, p. 165. Detlef Muller rightly stresses the general interest in the "ballast," but overemphasizes the interest in social exclusiveness as a motivation for driving it out of the Gymnasium, to the neglect of the legitimate educational concerns many delegates raised; he also ignores the large minority of delegates who supported a common foundation for all secondary schools: Soztalstruktur und Schulsrystem, p. 289.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF

1890

One of Gossler's first acts after the close of the conference was to offer Schottmuller, whose independent relations with the Kaiser he found intolerable, an opportunity to return to the Historical Institute in Rome, but the offer was refused.*? In proposing members for the committee required by Wilhelm's Cabinet Order, Gossler informed the Kaiser that they would work closely with Stauder and other officials from the ministry. This "Committee of Seven," which Wilhelm ap­ proved without comment, consisted of Hinzpeter, Schrader, Kropatscheck, Dr. Graf, Fiedler, Schlee, and Abbot Uhlhorn— both Frommel and Bodelschwingh had clearly made them­ selves unacceptable to Gossler as representatives of the Prot­ estant clergy. All but Schlee had supported the Kaiser's call for the abolition of the Realgymnasium; Hinzpeter was ob­ viously the man among Wilhelm's advisors who shared most closely Gossler's views of the Gymnasium. Kropatscheck, Schrader, Graf, Hinzpeter, and Uhlhorn could be expected to fight for as minimal cuts in the ancient languages as the con­ cern about reducing overburdening would allow.48 Neither the Ministry of Education nor the Committee of Seven operated in a vacuum, however; and immediately after the Christmas holidays ended, the protests began to pour into Berlin. Among the most outraged groups were the architects, for whom the resolutions of the conference had renewed the danger that their profession would become a haven for secondclass, or even third-class, Gebildeten. The abolition of the Realgymnasium, the reopening of civil service careers in ar­ chitecture to OberreaIschule graduates, and the proposed new examinations for Gymnasium graduates entering the technical institutes threatened to make knowledge of even Latin a rarity among architects in the future. This prospect moved organi­ zations in Berlin, Hannover, and elsewhere to petition the Minister of Public Works to retain the regulations he had decreed in 1886. At the same time, thirty-eight professors from 47 Waldersee,

Denkwiirdigkeiten, 1:170. to the Kaiser, z6 December 1890, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. iijF. 48 Gossler

(2Z7)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

the technical institutes issued a statement asserting, contrary to the declaration by a handful of their colleagues before the conference, that the Gymnasium did provide adequate prep­ aration for technical studies, and thus that no special exam­ ination was necessary s* The Realschulmanner made strategic use of their ties with local governments in their concerted struggle to save the semiclassical schools from the death sentence delivered by the Kai­ ser. Max von Forckenbeck, the mayor of Berlin, led the way, demanding on 16 February 1891 that Gossler allow the Realgymnasium to survive. Forckenbeck claimed that a city that had built and supported seven Realgymnasien, schools that "filled the intellectual and economic needs of the population" and had "won the full confidence of our citizens," should have a voice in decisions affecting these institutions. Advanc­ ing again the argument that seemed most likely to sway Gossler, he pointed out that if the Realgymnasien closed, their pupils would flock to the Gymnasien and create even more severe overcrowding in the learned professions. Over the next few weeks, the Ministry of Education received similar protests from Aachen, Frankfurt, Hannover, Barmen, Magdeburg, and Dortmund; the officials in Dortmund warned that parents had already begun withdrawing their sons from the semiclassical schools.'0 A separate plea for the Realgymnasium came from its two best friends among the professors of modern languages, Wilhelm Vietor and Eduard Stengel, who feared a return to the conditions existing before 1870, when few, and usually «» Peter Walle, Die Scbulkonferenz und das Baufach (Berlin, 1891), passim; declaration from professors at the technical institutes, February 1891, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, adhib. b, vol. II. Monatsblatt des Liberalen Schulvereins 9 (1891):91-94; letters from city officials in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, no. 13, vol. II. En­ rollments in the semiclassical schools fell 1.5 percent between the school year of 1890-1891 and that of 1891-1892., but this decline was matched by a similar drop in Gymnasium enrollment; attendance at the modern schools rose 6 percent, with the rise occurring entirely at the six-year Realschulen: see Russell, German Higher Schools, p. 426.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

not the best, Gymnasium graduates chose to study French or English.'1 The School Reform Association, still led by Friedrich Lange and Theodor Peters, followed two paths in its efforts to reverse the recommendations of the conference. On 25 February, it petitioned the House of Deputies to put aside the resolutions of the conference and work instead for the establishment of a common foundation for all secondary schools; in the Ed­ ucation Committee, Seyffardt, Schenckendorff, and Arendt backed Lange's insistence that the conference had been highly unrepresentative, but the majority of deputies voted in the usual manner merely to transmit the petition to the govern­ ment as material for future legislation.'1 The second effort by the School Reform Association involved a petition to the Kai­ ser from Prussian towns with only one secondary school. Mayor Reuscher of Brandenburg circulated this declaration, which argued that the conference resolutions did not reflect the "in­ ner essence" of the Kaiser's wishes. Reuscher repeated Lange's belief that six-year Realschulen offering no opportunity for transfer to a Gymnasium would never be popular and thus that only a modern common foundation for all schools would prevent towns with only one secondary school from wanting that one to be a classical institution. Officials from seventy communities signed this petition, representing less than onethird of the localities with just one school, but a large majority of those that did not already have a Gymnasium." The defenders of classical Bildung issued no specific dec­ laration against the proposed changes in the secondary schools, but even before the conference had ended, they did carry out the plans to found a "Gymnasium Association." A meeting on 15 December 1890 attracted, among others, fifteen dele­ gates to the school conference, including such leading de­ fenders of the classical schools as Schrader, Jaeger, Uhlig, >' Mitteilungen des A. D. Realscbulmdnnervereins, no. 18 (1891):21. s z Z f R 3 (1891):23-26; PA 33 (1891):675-701; Lange, Reines Deutschtum, p. 308. " Z/R 3 (1891):55.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF

1890

Zeller, Dr. Graf, and Kropatscheck. By the following May the new organization had 2,500 members, including most of the prominent figures who had signed the Heidelberg Declaration. With the threat of further inroads into the Gymnasium's mo­ nopoly over preparation for the universities at least tempo­ rarily stilled, the Gymnasium Association directed most of its propaganda in 1891 against further dilution of the ancient languages, especially as embodied in Lange's proposed com­ mon foundation." That the architects appealed to the Minister of Public Works, the Realschulmanner to the Minister of Education, and the School Reform Association to both the Prussian legislature and the Kaiser indicates how great the confusion was con­ cerning the best sources of aid in reversing the recommen­ dations of the conference before they became official decrees. Yet before most of these protests were organized, the work of turning the recommendations into new curricula and priv­ ileges was well under way. Before the first meeting of the Committee of Seven on 6 January 1891, Johann Stauder had already drafted possible distributions of hours for the different schools, including for the Realgymnasium in its "period of transition." Mirroring the Kaiser's interest in easing the work­ load, these plans contained an average reduction of two hours a week in all grades of each school. Contrary to the wishes of the conference, the ancient languages lost more time than the overall reduction at the Gymnasium, to allow increased attention to German and drawing. The transitional Realgymnasium had enough Latin in the lower grades to facilitate transfer to a Gymnasium in the fourth year, but only three hours a week in the upper grades. This resulted in a lower total than had existed before the increase of 1882.» Meeting again with Gossler's subordinates in February, the μ DhG ζ (1891):1-7, 49-61. At least twenty-three of the forty-three del­ egates to the conference eventually joined the Gymnasium Association. » Proposed distribution of credit hours in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 20, adhib. VIII; proceedings of the Committee of Seven in no. 115E.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

members of the Committee of Seven suggested only minor changes in the plans that Stauder had submitted. Over the next few months, they concentrated on deciding what should be taught in the hours allotted to the various subjects each year, aided by memoranda from selected teachers throughout Germany and by inspection tours of Prussian and non-Prussian schools taken by some members of the Committee.** Noteworthy in their recommendations was a powerful swing away from teaching grammar as an end in itself and toward using inductive methods for teaching foreign languages. The Committee shared the conference's temperate response to the Kaiser's politicization of instruction in history and German, but did urge that these subjects, along with religion, be han­ dled as a common "ethical core" at all schools. The inspection tours produced a very negative reaction to the methodological rigidity of the neo-Herbartian pedagogy, especially at Her­ mann Schiller's school in Giessen, but little else that affected the ultimate recommendations of the Committee. The Committee of Seven had no power to negotiate with Prussian and Reich authorities about privileges, so this aspect of the school reform remained entirely in Gossler's hands. On 23 January, he informed the Prussian ministers of the changes that the conference had called for, essentially the same exten­ sion of privileges for graduates of Oberrealschulen and sixyear modem schools that he had failed to push through in the 1880s. Maybach (Public Works) protested the renewed attempt to open civil service careers in architecture to Oberrealschule graduates, sending Gossler copies of all the petitions he had received from the architects' organizations. At a meet­ ing of the Ministry of State on 1 March, Berlepsch (Com­ merce) objected to allowing Oberrealschule graduates to be­ come mining engineers, and Miquel (Finance) argued that subordinate officials in his administration needed more than the six years of secondary education offered by the Realschule. >' Memoranda on simplifying the curricula in ibid., no. 115G, vols. I and II; reports on inspection trips in no. 115, vol. Ill; Committee's recommen­ dations on the curricula in no. zo, adhib. VIII.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

A few days later, Heyden (Agriculture) echoed his predecessor Lucius in saying to Gossler that he would permit graduates of the modern schools to enter the state forestry service only if Maybach and Berlepsch relented, yet another example of the concern with relative status within the Prussian civil serv­ ice.57 Two and a half months after the end of the school conference, Gossler's efforts to reduce the population of the Gymnasien and to ease the overcrowding of the professions through expanding the privileges granted at the modern schools had apparently failed again. For the other Prussian ministers, getting the "ballast" out of the Gymnasium was still not such a desirable goal that they were willing to let members of that "ballast" enter the civil service. On 9 March, Gossler finally submitted his resignation. Other issues entered into his decision—he was under fire from the Center party over the latest bill for the elementary schools and had been embarrassed by Caprivi's reversal of position regarding the release of church funds confiscated during the Kulturkamppi—but he left office primarily because the events surrounding the Cabinet Order of 1 May 1889 and the school conference had so crippled his relations with the Kaiser that he could no longer function effectively as a minister. In early January Wilhelm had already discussed possible successors for Gossler with Hinzpeter; on 3 March, he complained that Gossler did not have his subordinates under control. These subordinates themselves reportedly thought that the time had come for their chief to leave and take advantage of an op­ portunity to be appointed governor of West Prussia.59 In ten years as Minister of Education, Gossler had made only minor changes in the secondary schools after inheriting the new cur" GossIer to ministers, 23 January 1891, and Maybach to Gossler, 6 and 27 February, in ibid., no. 129, vol. Ill; protocol for meeting of 1 March 1891 in ZStA-II, Staatsministerium, Rep. 90a, Abt. B, Tit. Ill 2b, no. 6, vol. 105. 1* Nichols, Germany After Bismarck, pp. 71, 97-101. " Waldersee, Denkwiirdigkeiten, 2:175; diary entry of 3 March 1891 in Bosse Papers, vol. VII; Schulenburg, Briefwechsel Diltbey—Yorck, p. 122; Vossische Zeitung and National-Zeitung, 11 March 1891; NAZ, 13 March.

(23Z)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

ricula of 1882 in nearly completed form; perhaps closest to his heart was his strong support for physical fitness. He failed, however, in his primary goal of stemming the flood to the Gymnasien and the universities by luring the "ballast" to the modern schools through increased privileges. Bismarck had sympathized with this goal, but had never supported Gossler's method because he did not want the "ballast" from the lower orders of society entering the lower levels of the civil service. When Gossler might have received the needed support from Wilhelm to overcome the resistance of the other ministers, as his successor was to do, he was out of step with the more extensive reforms of secondary education that the Kaiser wanted. He might have departed from Berlin a happier man if he had resigned with Bismarck in 1890, or even at the time of the Cabinet Order in 1889. The choice of Count Robert von Zedlitz-Trutzschler to suc­ ceed Gossler resulted from Caprivi's concern over the gov­ ernment's relations with the Center party, not at all from considerations involving the reform of secondary education. Zedlitz cut an unusual figure as the head of the Prussian ed­ ucational administration, being not a university-trained law­ yer, but a member of the "ballast" who had left the Gym­ nasium without an Abitur. At first, some officials in the Ministry of Education viewed his appointment as "treason against the German intellectual community," but his straightforward manner soon made him more popular with his subordinates than his predecessor had been.60 A complete dilettante in matters of secondary education, Zedlitz necessarily relied heavily on Johann Stauder for guid­ ance in the complex situation bequeathed him by Gossler. This was particularly true in the decision to save the Realgymnasium, which has often been credited to Zedlitz.6* In the interim between Gossler's resignation and the public an60 M. Schimmelpfennig, "Robert Graf von Zedlitz-Trutzschler," Zt. des Vereins fiir Geschicbte Schlesiens 56 (1922):74. 61 Schmeding, Entwieklung des realistisehen hdheren Schulwesens, p. 147; Adolf Matthias, Im Zeiehen der Sehulrefortn (Berlin, 1913), p. 141.

U33)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

nouncement of it, Stauder had written a letter to the school board of the Dortmund Realgymnasium in an attempt to per­ suade pupils' parents not to withdraw their sons from the school; he reported that the phasing out of the semiclassical schools would take "a long series of years" and that the only immediate changes in them would be the reduction in Latin that he had already outlined to the Committee of Seven and an end of the right of their graduates to study modern lan­ guages, as Schrader's theses for the conference had originally proposed.61 Zedlitz adopted this position in a conversation with Eduard Schauenburg of the Realschulmanner late in April, suggesting that although the resolutions of the conference must form the basis of any reform, the Ministry of Education could neither destroy historically proven institutions nor trample on the interests of the towns. He repeated these views in his first discussions of the issue in the House of Deputies and with the Committee of Seven, but he also told the latter that he would oppose the establishment of any new Realgymnasium. Sten­ gel's and Vietor's argument about the likely effect of the ex­ clusion of Realgymnasium graduates from the study of mod­ ern languages, which they repeated in a letter to Zedlitz, apparently convinced him that even this restriction on the semiclassical schools should not be imposed: in July he in­ formed these two professors that "for practical reasons" Real­ gymnasium graduates would retain the privilege originally granted by Heinrich von Miihler in 1870.63 Perhaps unknowingly, Zedlitz thus returned the Realgymnasien to the unpopular state of the first-class Realschulen iiMonatsblatt

des Liberalett Schulvereins 9 (1891):83. Johann Stauder's "Erlauterungen zu dem Fragebogen" from before the conference had indi­ cated that he preferred to eliminate all university privileges from the Real­ gymnasium, and to allow it and the Oberrealschule to compete as preparatory schools for the technical institutes: see n. 60 to chapter 6. 61 Schauenburg to Zedlitz, 2 May 1891, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. Ill; Committee meeting of 29 May in no. 115E; SB, XVII:3, p. 2,144 (4 May 1891); Stengel and Vietor to Zedlitz, 30 April 1891, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, no. 13, vol. II; Zedlitz to Vietor and Stengel, 22 July 1891, in COIR 19 (1891):656.

(2-34)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

before the additional Latin of the curriculum of 1882; he had certainly vitiated the most important structural change rec­ ommended by the conference. If Gossler had been able to exclude the patrons of the Realgymnasium from the confer­ ence in order to prevent demands for further privileges, Zedlitz could not go further and abolish these schools against the will of the cities and towns that had supported them. As Stauder's letter to the officials in Dortmund indicates, the argument raised at the conference about the increased "ballast" and academic proletariat that would result from the abolition of the semiclassical schools found a sympathetic hearing as soon as Gossler resigned; that even in January Stauder had spoken about a "period of transition" for these schools suggests that Gossler himself may have been less favorably inclined to the Kaiser's sudden attack on the Realgymnasium than he had indicated during the conference. I found no evidence that sug­ gests Wilhelm ever complained about the failure to carry through his death sentence on the Realgymnasium, or that any special effort was ever made by Zedlitz to justify its survival. If these measures amounted to a step backward, the con­ trary was true of Zedlitz's actions to expand the career op­ portunities of pupils from the modern schools. After further discussions with Maybach, Berlepsch, and Miquel had failed to break their resistance, Zedlitz appealed to Wilhelm for a new statement of support, which he provided on 14 June. Armed with this backing, Zedlitz brought the issue before the Ministry of State again on 22 June, his task eased by Maybach's retirement a few days earlier. At this session, Caprivi, who never displayed much interest in secondary school re­ form, remarked very casually that if the Kaiser thought that expanded privileges for modern schools were crucial for the total reform package, the question was already decided; in­ dividual interests would have to be sacrificed for the general goal.64 Berlepsch held out the longest, but the Ministry of 6« Lucanus to Zedlitz, 11 June 1891, and notes by Zedlitz dated 15 June, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 129, vol. IV; protocol for

(2.35)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1890

State finally agreed to open civil service careers in mining, architecture, and forestry to Oberrealschule graduates and to reduce the requirements for subordinate officials in all min­ istries to six years of secondary schooling.6' In his first 100 days in office, Zedlitz had succeeded where Gossler had failed for a decade. Zedlitz's influence proved decisive in one other change made in the wake of the conference, the establishment in Frankfurtam-Main of a Gymnasium resting on a modern foundation, teaching only six years of Latin and four of Greek. The original impulse for this school came from the new mayor of Frankfurt, Franz Adickes, who had previously been mayor of Altona, where Ernst Schlee's Realgymnasium had operated with a modern foundation since 1878. Adickes interested other city officials in the idea when they were formulating their protest against the abolition of the Realgymnasien; finding a willing collaborator in Karl Reinhardt, the director of one of the city's classical schools, Adickes asked Zedlitz in May to permit an experiment with such a school. A letter from Zedlitz to Miquel in July indicated his interest in even extending such an ex­ periment to other cities, but final approval of the proposal came only after Stauder and Reinhardt had worked out details of the curriculum in November. When the new regulations for all secondary schools went into effect on 1 April 1892, a Gymnasium and two Realgymnasien in Frankfurt offered their first-year pupils French as the only foreign language.66 meeting of 22 June in Staatsministerium, Rep. 90a, Abt. B, Tit. III 2b, no. 6, vol. 106. On Maybach's retirement, see Rohl, GermanyWithout Bismarck, P- 63. Caprivi never said much about secondary education, but he apparently was a confirmed believer in the value of classical Btldung; see the letters from 1894 and 189s in Max Schneidewin,"Bnefe des Reichskanzlersvon Capnvi," Deutsche Revue 47, no. ζ (1922):143, z y . Bolton, Secondary School System, p. 321; Kasuya, Sec­ ondary Education of Girls, p. 23.

(!S3)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF I9OO

If debate of the demands of the present in the 1890s man­ aged to escape from the distraction caused by the overcrowded professions and focus more closely on the provision of sec­ ondary and higher education to a greater segment of the pop­ ulation, a more appropriate valuation of modern subject mat­ ter, and the possible delay of educational tracking, the discussion of a "German education" was diverted largely into the chan­ nels carved out by Wilhelm's desire to politicize history in­ struction. Most of the commentary on Wilhelm's various pro­ nouncements was highly critical. At the first German Historians' Congress, which was organized and attended principally by south German professors and Gymnasium teachers, the del­ egates resolved that history instruction should impart knowl­ edge that would enable pupils to make political decisions in later life, but should not extol specific political convictions; they rejected an amendment saying that history teaching should also "awaken love of the fatherland and a strong sense of duty to the state."" Defenders of the Gymnasium such as Oskar Jaeger, Gustav Uhlig, Paul Cauer, and even the Con­ servative politician Hermann Kropatscheck continued to ar­ gue for an objective teaching of history that would, they be­ lieved, be sufficient to develop patriotic sentiments. Jaeger especially maintained his insistence on an apolitical devotion to scholarship as the ideal for Gymnasium teachers, although this stance offered no solution for the elementary school teach­ ers who were not trained as scholars.1' Given these examples of open resistance to the Kaiser's 11

DeutscheZeitschrtftfur Geschtehtswissenschaft 9 (1893):154-165; Karl Dietrich Erdmann, "Geschichte, Politik und Padagogik," Gesehichte tn Wtssensehaft und Untemeht 19 (1968):2-11. On the general reaction to Wil­ helm's views on history instruction, see Hoffmann, Polittsehe Btldung, pp. 56-74; and Brunkhorst, Etnbeztehung der preusstschen Sehule tn die Poltttk, pp. 68-70. >» Weymar, Selbstverstandnts der Deutsehen, pp. 222-225; Pau' Cauer, Aus Berufund Leben (Berlin, 1912), p. 205; Gustav Uhhg in DhG 4 (1893):24; Hermann Kropatscheck in DhG 6 (1895):28. For an important favorable response to Wilhelm's ideas, see Hermann Grimm, Fragmente (Berlin and Stuttgart, 1900), pp. 208-244.

U54)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

wishes, it is difficult to judge the impact of the new regulations and directives that incorporated these views, except in terms of the changes made in textbooks.1'' Foreign observers of the Prussian secondary schools in the 1890s, most of whom dis­ agreed with Wilhelm's effort to politicize history instruction, generally suggested that the effect of the new rules in the classroom had been minimal, which can be interpreted as indicating that Gossler had been right when he claimed that the schools under his administration had not been as neglectful of their tasks as Wilhelm thought.1* Demands that the schools adopt a more nationalistic tone certainly did not stop after the new curricula of 1892, although the radical nationalist groups that emerged in the 1890s, such as the Pan-German League and the Navy League, paid little attention to the sec­ ondary schools.26 Other school reformers continued to press •4 For changes in elementary school textbooks, see Walter C. Langsam, "Nationalism and History in the Prussian Elementary Schools under William II," in E. M. Earle, ed., Nationalism and Internationalism (New York, 1950); and James M. Olson, "Nationalistic Values in Prussian Schoolbooks prior to World War 1," Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 1 (1973):4759. For the secondary schools, see Horst Schallenberger, Untersuchungen zum Geschichtsbild der Wtlhelmmischen Aera und der Wetmarer Zeit (Ratingen bei Dusseldorf, 1964). '> Thurber, "The Higher Schools of Prussia," p. 336; Russell, German Higher Schools, pp. 194-296; Bolton, Secondary School System, pp. 247248; Pinloche, L'enseignement secondatre en Allemagne, p. xxvi; Lucy Maynard Salmon, "History in the German Gymnasia," Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1S97 (Washington, 1898), pp. 78-80. On Salmon's study of history teaching, see also the recent article by Hartmut Lehmann, "Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft als Vorbild," Kteler Htstonsche Studien 16 (1972):384-396. ** Geoff Eley mentions the Navy League and the Colonial Society editing readers dealing with their special interests in the early 1900s, but it is not clear that these were for the secondary schools: Reshaping the German Right, p. 170. Lothar Werner described a number of educational efforts by the PanGermans after the turn of the century, but the Pan-Germans' own summary of the first two decades of the League's work does not mention any efforts to "Germanize" the schools: see Werner, Der Alldeutsehe Verband, 1S901918 (Berlin, 1935), pp. 86-90; and Alldeutsche Verband, Zwanzig Jahre Alldeutscher Arbeit und Kampfe (Leipzig, 1910).

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF

1900

for increased concentration on German language and history in the schools without using an aggressively chauvinistic tone: a prime example was the second edition of Friedrich Paulsen's History of Scholarly Instruction, published in 1897, which repeated his views on the need for a German humanism as the core of a modern Bildung. Similarly, when Theodor Mommsen welcomed the professor of German literature Erich Schmidt into the Prussian Academy of Sciences in 1895, he spoke of how Lessing and Goethe would eventually have to take the place of Homer and Horace at the core of secondary education.27 The sharp reduction in classroom hours instituted in 1892 apparently succeeded in at least temporarily lessening the pub­ lic outcry about overburdening; the next several years saw a perceptible decline in the number of inflammatory pamphlets, speeches, and articles dealing with the threat to the national health posed by the secondary schools, except for the attacks on the new examination after Untersekunda. Bosse consulted once with the Royal Scientific Deputation for Medical Affairs on the issue of overburdening, but in general he paid little attention to it; in 1895, he even allowed individual Gymnasien and Realgymnasien to reintroduce an extra hour per week of Latin in the upper three grades.18 The most important change in the overburdening question during the 1890s was a turn from hypothesis and assertion to quantification, as physicians and psychologists attempted to establish methods for measuring mental capacity and fa­ tigue. Many of the early tests were inconclusive, either being fatiguing in themselves or failing to provide a precise meas­ urement of mental fatigue. The leading researchers often reached 27 Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Unterriehts (2ded.), 2:634-635, 656657, 662—663; Sitzungsberiehte der Koniglich-Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Jahrgang 1895, 2:741-742·· 18 Centralblatt, 1896, pp. 725-728. Like Puttkamer and Gossler, Bosse took a strong stand against schoolboy fraternities, but he did not blame them for overburdening pupils: Centralblatt, 1892, pp. 810-811, and 1897, p.

433·

(2-5 6 )

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF I9OO

varying conclusions on questions such as whether afternoon classes were preferable to a longer morning session or whether an hour of gymnastics and games served to refresh or to ex­ haust the average pupil.19 These researchers also struggled with the problem of when fatigue became so detrimental to learning that further instruction was useless or harmful; as the psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus pointed out, "We can­ not with justice demand of the school that it leave its pupils' capacities completely intact through the course of the morn­ ing."'0 By the end of the decade, this early research had brought the issue of overburdening back to public attention; in both 1898 and 1899, the Scientists' and Physicians' Convention saw lively discussions of overburdening, with the delegates in the latter year adopting a resolution calling for a reduction to twenty-four hours per week of classes and the abolition of afternoon classes.'1 The advocates of better school hygiene in the 1890s often called for the employment of school physicians to monitor physical conditions and pupils' health, but budg­ etary restrictions and the resistance of school directors and teachers, who believed the physicians would impinge on their professional freedom, prevented any progress in this area.'2 Throughout the last decade of the centuiy, the overwork and undercompensation of secondary school teachers atLeo Biirgerstein, "Die Arbeitskurve einer Schulstunde," Zt. fur Schulgesundheitspflege 4 (1891):543-563; Emil Kraepelin, UebergeistigeArbeit (2d ed.; Jena, 1897); idem, Zur Ueberbiirdungsfrage (Jena, 1897); Hermann Ebbinghaus, "Ueber eine neue Methode zur Priifung geistiger Fahigkeiten," Zt. ftir Psychologie urtd Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 13 (1897):401-457; Ludwig Wagner, Unterricht und Ermudung (Berlin, 1898). For summaries of this work in English, see Kotelmann, School Hygiene, pp. 173-190; and Hermann T. Lukens, "The School Fatigue Question in Germany," Educa­ tional Review 15 (1898):2.46-2.54. JO Ebbinghaus, "Priifung geistiger Fahigkeiten," p. 443. >• Verhandlungett der Gesellschaft deutscher Naturforscher und Aerzte,70. Versammlung, pp. 117-222, and 71. Versammlung, pp. 298-299. See also PA 41 (1899):513-514, 748-749, for the foundation of an "Association for Rational School Reform and School Hygiene," composed largely of physi­ cians. '* See Hermann Schiller, Die Schularztfrage (Berlin, 1899).

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

traded as much attention as the overburdening of pupils. Every session of the House of Deputies from 1893 to 1899 witnessed a discussion of some aspect of the teachers' situa­ tion. The continued long wait for full-time positions was the most prominent issue, but teachers also complained that even when employed they earned less and ranked lower than other civil servants with an equivalent level of training, and that the maximum permissible teaching load of twenty-two hours per week tended to become the norm, even when many teachers were looking for work. Two pamphlets written by a teacher named Heinrich Schroder served to publicize the overburden­ ing of teachers as Paul Hasse's and Emil Hartwich's writings had done for that of pupils in the 1880s; Schroder noted particularly that only 15 percent of teachers' sons chose to follow their fathers' careers, compared to over 45 percent for lawyers, physicians, and pastors, and that the average life expectancy and length of service for secondary teachers were several years below the figures for the other professions.» Friedrich Paulsen also entered the lists for the overworked teachers, writing in the Vossische Zeitung that "the frequency of excessive fatigue, overstrain, nervousness, and illness among teachers is alarmingly high."'·* In 1895, when over seven hundred teachers traveled to Friedrichsruh to honor Bismarck on his eightieth birthday, the former Chancellor also recog­ nized the legitimacy of their complaints: "There exists," he remarked, "a disparity between the importance of the sec­ ondary school teachers for the future of our country and the appreciation they have received until now."" The pay raise Wilhelm had sponsored in 1890 had apparently been insuf» Heinrich Schroder, Oberlehrer, Richter, Offiziere (Kiel, 1897), p. 28; idem, Der hohere Lehrerstand in Preussen (Kiel, 1899), pp. 38, 48-52. On the changing nature of the teaching profession, see William Setchel Learned, The Oberlehrer (Cambridge, Mass., 1914), and the excellent article by Hartmut Titze, "Die soziale und geistige Umbildung des preussischen Oberlehrerstandes von 1870 bis 1914," in Hermann, ed., Historische Padagogik. >< Paulsen, Padagogische und didaktische Abhandlungen, pp. 218-223; idem, Autobiography, pp. 384, 396-397. » Bismarck cited in DhG 6 (1895):58.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

ficient to alleviate the conditions that produced the embittered teachers he and Chaplain Frommel had spoken of at the con­ ference; if either classical, modern, or national Bildung was going to be successful in reviving the idealism of German youth, more needed to be done to obtain spirited and inspiring teachers. Unhappiness with the failure of the school conference and the new regulations to stimulate such a revitalization of sec­ ondary education contributed during the 1890s to the spread of challenges to the spirit of the schools that were similar to the critiques made earlier by Paul de Lagarde and Julius Langbehn. This interest in pedagogical rather than structural re­ form was expressed in three movements that, at heart, aimed at a more harmonious Bildung of the pupil's personality than the allegedly one-sided intellectualism of the Gymnasium pro­ duced.'6 The art education, country boarding school, and youth movements were still in their infancy when the school con­ ference of 1900 was convened; if the next effort at reforming Prussian secondary education had not come until 1905 or 1910, these new concerns might well have caused as much attention to be paid to the style as to the structure of secondary schooling. The art education movement followed to a degree the pre­ scriptions of Langbehn's Rembrandt as Educator, with a num­ ber of writers arguing that an education to and through art— developing both aesthetic taste and creative talent—offered a means of salvation from the ugliness and alienation of modern life. Much of the agitation for art education centered on the elementary schools, or, as in the pioneering work of Alfred Lichtwark at the Hamburg Kunsthalle, on reaching the adult population. The leading advocate of better art education in the secondary schools was Konrad von Lange, a professor of art history at the University of Konigsberg, who wrote in 1893, "Our Gymnasium Bildung is not only incapable of The most accessible survey is Sterling Fishman, The Struggle for German Youth (New York, 1976); but see the review of this very problematical work in the American Historical Review 84 (1979):193.

(2-59)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

developing a productive artistic talent, but also fails to train the pupil's appreciation for the visual arts sufficiently for the needs of his later life." This movement grew sufficiently to sponsor a series of three "Art Education Congresses." These met between 1901 and 1905, however, after the decisions of the conference of 1900 had been taken.37 Similar in inspiration to the art education movement was the first country boarding school founded in 1898 by Her­ mann Lietz. Born on the island of Riigen in the Baltic, Lietz had come to detest both the German classical schools and the "big" city when he was sent to a Gymnasium in Greifswald. He studied with the pedagogical reformer Wilhelm Rein at Jena, but the decisive influence on his educational thinking stemmed from a year spent teaching German at the new Eng­ lish boarding school Abbotsholme in 1896-1897. Abbotsholme resembled in many ways the "new German school" advocated by Hugo Goering; Lietz returned to Germany with plans to found a similar "school for living" far from the cor­ rupting city. Although the Ministry of Education blocked his attempt to present his ideas to the Kaiser, Bosse did not pro­ hibit Lietz from founding a boarding school at Ilsenburg in the Harz in 1898. Lietz conceived of his school as "molding pupils with harmonious and independent characters, German youths who are healthy in mind and body, physically, prac­ tically, academically, and artistically proficient, and capable of clear thinking, warm feelings, and spirited volition." The school began its operation with only seven pupils and grew slowly for the next few years, so that whatever influence Lietz exercised came only after the turn of the century. Lietz himself turned more and more to a volkisch nationalism, and Jews, 37 Fishman,

Struggle, pp. 9-33; Konrad von Lange, Die kunstlerische Erztehung der deutschen Jugend (Darmstadt, 1893), P· 79; J· Richter, Die Entwtcklung des kunsterztehertschen Gedankens (Leipzig, 1909), p. 228. On the more radical critics of the city and the schools, see Erika Jenny, Dte Hetmatkunstbewegung (Basel, 1934); for a general look at developments after 1900, see Hermann Lorenzen, ed., Die Kunsterziehungbewegung (Bad Heilbronn, 1966).

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF I^OO

who in the first years made up a large percentage of his pupils, were later to be unwelcome at Ilsenburg and its successors.38 The seeds of the German youth movement, the Wandervogel, also lay in the 1890s, but not until after 1905 could the excursions and wanderings organized by Heinrich Hoff­ mann, Karl Fischer, and their followers from the Steglitz Gym­ nasium in suburban Berlin be described as influential. Walter Laqueur has written that it would be misleading to see the early Wandervogel as pioneers "conscious of a mission," but this is not quite true: for Heinrich Hoffmann at least, wan­ dering in the countryside with a group of young companions offered a wide variety of opportunities for self-education, or Bildung, that classroom instruction in the Gymnasium did not provide.'9 The early Wandervogel were more interested in escaping than reforming the secondary schools; in fact, the Steglitz Gymnasium was one of the most progressive in Prus­ sia, and some of its teachers, including Ludwig Gurlitt, gave strong encouragement to the first youth groups.'·0 These three nascent movements were portents of things to come, but in the 1890s their impact was immeasurably less than the demands to open the universities to women, the struggle for parity with the universities by the technical in­ stitutes, and the continuing agitation in favor of a common foundation and equal privileges for the Realgymnasien and >' Hermann Lietz, Schulreform durch Neugriindung, ed. Rudolf Lassahn (Paderborn, 1970), p. 31 and passim; Fishman, Struggle, pp. 42-81. George Mosse seriously overestimates Lietz's influence: The Crisis of German Ideology, pp. 160—170. For an example of contemporaneous French admiration of Abbotsholme, see Edmond Demolins, Λ quoi tient la superiorite des AngloSaxons? (Paris, 1897), pp. 43-80. '» Walter Laqueur, Young Germany (New York, 1962), p. 17; Georg Korth, Wandervogel, 1896-1906 (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1967), p. 41; Werner Kindt, Die Wandervogelzeit (Diisseldorf and Cologne, 1968), pp. 11-16. Fishman, Struggle, pp. 91-98; Bluher, Werke wtd Tage, 1:23; Karl Fischer, cited in Korth, Wandervogel, pp. 194-195; Kindt, Wandervogelzeit pp. 4044, 53-56, 69. On the general relation of the early youth movement to the schools, see Heinz Stephen Rosenbusch, Die deutsche Jugendbewegung in ihren pddagogischen Formen und Wirkungen (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1973), esp. pp. 39, 63·

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

Oberrealschulen. This agitation, after a lull of several years, began to revive in 1896 with new appeals for opening medical studies to Realgymnasium graduates from officials in Duisburg, Dortmund, Kassel, Chemnitz, and Frankfurt-am-Main. Mayor Adickes and forty-nine other lawyers and civil servants from Frankfurt extended this plea in 1898 to include legal studies, pointing to the need for civil servants who felt more at home in the modern world; their petition was also sup­ ported by officials from Essen and by the Cologne Industri­ alists' Association, which issued a declaration signed by mem­ bers of such famous industrial families as Camphausen, Thyssen, Stinnes, Kirdorf, and Silverberg.41 The same year witnessed appeals from Prussia's twenty-nine Oberrealschulen that grad­ uates of the modern schools receive equal treatment in military careers with graduates of Gymnasien and Realgymnasien.*1 The German Engineers' Association also returned to the fray in 1898, repeating in an address to Bosse the support for a modern common foundation and equal privileges for all schools that it had first expressed in 1886. The memorandum accom­ panying this address insisted that the times demanded a sec­ ondary education that would "enable our youth not only to comprehend, but also to contribute to, the vast changes that our entire culture has experienced and daily still experiences through the tremendous progress in our understanding of na­ ture."43 Thus by the late 1890s, the brief lull in agitation for reform that had followed the curricula of 1892 had already come to an end. 8 Klaussmann, Kaiserreden, p. 295.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

named—Adolf Slaby of Charlottenburg, Wilhelm Launhardt of Hannover, and Otto Intze of Aachen—were all graduates of Realgymnasien; Slaby, an early experimenter with wireless telegraphy, had been an intimate of the Kaiser's for several years, often lecturing the royal entourage on recent scientific discoveries." Slaby helped convince Wilhelm of the justice of the demand that the technical institutes be empowered to bestow doctor­ ates; and in the face of the opposition previously discussed, Wilhelm decreed this second measure of equality between the two institutions of higher learning on 19 October 1899, the one hundredth anniversary of the founding of the forerunner of the technical institute in Charlottenburg. In a public letter to Alois Riedler, then rector at Charlottenburg, Wilhelm noted, "I was pleased to be able to honor the technical institutes.. . . I wanted to bring the technical institutes to the forefront be­ cause they have important problems to solve, social as well as technical. These have not yet been handled to my satisfac­ tion; you could exercise a strong influence on social relations through your many ties to workers and to industry. . . . I am counting on the technical institutes! I view Social Democracy as a transitory phenomenon that will play itself out, but you must make clear to your students their social duties toward the workers."60 The Kaiser was clearly still interested in re" RA, 15 June 1898. Intze (1843-1904) was famous for his work in dam construction; Launhardt (1832-1918), an economist, recorded his faith in the Btldung to be gained from science in his Am sausenden Webstuhl der Zeit (Leipzig and Berlin, 1900), esp. pp. 86-88. On Slaby, see Wilhelm II, Eretgntsse und Gestalten, p. 163; Keller, 40 Jahre, pp. 163, 182., 189, Z19; and Count Robert von Zedlitz-Truzschler, Twelve Years at the Imperial German Court, trans. Alfred Kalisch (New York, 1924), p. 88, which says that Slaby "unfortunately passes all bounds in the matter of flattery and servility." 60 Wilhelm II, Eretgntsse und Gestalten, p. 164; Manegold, Universitat, Techntsche Hochschule und Industrie, pp. 291-300; Rurup, Wtssenschaft und Gesellschaft, 1:19; Hohenlohe, Denkwurdigkeiten des Reichskanzlerzeit, p. 513; Klaussmann, Kaiserreden, pp. 296-298.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

forming the Gymnasium, expanding modern knowledge, and using the educational system to counter socialist propaganda. Until January of 1900, Wilhelm's activities apparendy evolved independently of the reforms being planned by Althoff and Studt. On 23 January, however, the Tagliche Rundschau re­ ported: A reform of our secondary school system in sight! As we have learned from unimpeachable sources, the Kaiser is seriously considering subjecting the Prussian secondary schools to a radical reform. He has been convinced by var­ ious occurrences, especially experiences with the training of naval officers, that as currently constituted our schools take too little heed of the needs of practical life. He has, therefore, taken up again his earlier reform plans, which, as is known, were frustrated by the resistance of the edu­ cators' conference. The Kaiser has expressed his firm resolve to see his will prevail this time.61 On 28 January, after several other newspapers had questioned this story, the Tagliche Rundschau said that Wilhelm had made these comments in "a conversation with an educator whom he has always honored with special trust." This edu­ cator could only be one person, Willie's old tutor Georg Hinzpeter; on 27 January, Althoff wrote to Hinzpeter asking him to convince the Kaiser not to take any steps before talking with Studt.61 On 5 February, Studt sent the Kaiser a long report for which there was no justification unless Wilhelm was pressing for new reforms. The report analyzed the successes and failures *' Tagliche Rundschau, 2.3 January 1900. The same day, Friedrich Lange requested an audience with Studt to discuss the common foundation: ZStΑΙΙ, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 117. 61 Tagliche Rundschau, 28 January 1900; Althoff to Hinzpeter letter men­ tioned in Brunkhorst, Einbeziehung der preussischen Schule in die Politik, p. 83. A letter from Studt to Hinzpeter, 9 March 1900, refers to a conversation between the two that apparently took place between the appearance of the article and 5 February: ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. IV. (2.71)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

of the changes of 1890-1892, pointing to the progress in reducing overburdening and improving instruction in modern languages, but noting several continuing problems. Studt crit­ icized the six-year examination for disrupting the course work in Untersekunda and encouraging pupils who passed to stay on until the Abitur. He informed Wilhelm of the proceedings regarding medical studies and said that the Ministry of Ed­ ucation was considering establishing a bifurcation after Obertertia into a classical track with Frankfurt's four years of Greek and what he called a Latin-English Gymnasium; harkening back to the Kaiser's attack on the semiclassical schools in 1890, Studt said that this structure would allow the Realgymnasien to wither away—although this Latin-English Gym­ nasium was really a Realgymnasium with more Latin. Studt explicitly stated that he planned no new school conference, but was going to solicit advice from experienced men outside the educational administration, including Wilhelm's confi­ dants Slaby and Hinzpeter.6' The Kaiser's interest was now clearly aroused; on 8 Feb­ ruary, Lucanus informed Studt that Wilhelm would like to attend a session of the planned deliberations, which effectively forced Studt to elevate them into a conference. Wilhelm had also suggested including Otto Kiibler, director of the Wilhelmsgymnasium in Berlin and then overseeing the education of the young Princes August WiIhelm and Oskar. Two days later, the Kaiser again bemoaned the deficiencies of the average Gymnasium graduate, this time in conversation with the in­ dustrialist Walter Rathenau. When Crown Prince Wilhelm passed his Abitur examination at Plon on 22 February, the Kaiser decided in his typically impulsive fashion that, as a special act of grace, he would announce at the celebration of the Crown Prince's majority on 6 May that graduates of the cadet academies could enter medical and legal careers. Baron von Funck, inspector of the military schools, informed Studt and Schonstedt of this royal wish on 6 March, adding that " Studt to the Kaiser, 5 February 1900, in ibid., no. 115F.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

the new privileges would help the cadet academies obtain "sufficient replacements." The next day, Studt emphasized to the Ministry of State how inconvenient Wilhelm's latest in­ spiration was when negotiations about medical privileges for Realgymnasium graduates were under way; he urged quick action on this matter and later asked Hohenlohe to expedite the handling of the issue in the Bundesrat.64 On 13 March, Hinzpeter told Studt that in dealing with the Kaiser he would do well to emphasize the positive results of the conference of 1890—lessening of overburdening, better attention to German, and easing of the Abitur examination; apparently, not all of Studt's report of 5 February had been well received by Wilhelm. On 20 February, Lucanus informed Studt that Wilhelm also wanted Funck and Baron von Seckendorff, commander of the cadet corps and former aide-decamp to the Kaiser, to join in the discussions; Studt replied that he wanted to gather written opinions from a number of experts and would not send an agenda to the Kaiser for several more weeks.65 Among the opinions he solicited were those of professors of law. At the Ministry of State session of 7 March Schonstedt had argued that the legal faculties should have a voice in any decision to admit cadet academy graduates. On 19 March, Studt went beyond this by asking a number of law professors whether or not they would object to allowing Realgymnasium and Oberrealschule graduates to study law if they passed the ** Lucanus to Studt, 8 February 1900, in ibid.; Hans Dieter Hellige, "Wil­ helm II und Walther Rathenau," Gescbichte in Wissensehaft und Unterrieht 19 (1968):544; Keller, 40 Jahre, p. 219; protocol for 7 March 1900 in ZStAII, Staatsministerium, Rep. 90a, Abt. B, Tit. Ill zb, no. 6, vol. 140; Studt to Hohenlohe, 9 March, and Heinrich von Gossler to all ministers, 10 March, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, no. 13, vol. III. Manfred Messerschmidt noted the importance of the cadet academies to the school reform of 1900, but not the link to the Crown Prince's graduation: "Militar und Schule," pp. 57, 65. ·» Hinzpeter to Studt, 13 March, and Lucanus to Studt, 10 March, in ZStAII, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z. no. 115, vol. IV; Studt to Lucanus, 21 March, in no. 115F.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

same sort of supplemental examination in Latin being con­ sidered for medical studies. The replies he received were ex­ tremely varied, several saying there was no practical need for lawyers to know Greek, others insisting on the importance of the allgemeine Bildung it provided, and still others referring to the overcrowding of the profession that would result if the requirement to know Greek was dropped.66 On ζ April, Studt and Althoff met with their subordinates and a few outsiders, including Kubler but not Funck or Seckendorff, to decide what proposals the Ministry of Education would make. They agreed definitely on the bifurcation plan of an option between Greek and English in the sixth year despite what this would do to the relative termination after Untersekunda·, they also agreed that Latin should be strength­ ened at both Gymnasien and Realgymnasien. In accord with the continuing uncertainty about how much the special conditions contributed to the success of the Frankfurt Reformgymnasium, the meeting decided against the universal adoption of a modern common foundation. It also recom­ mended that the six-year examination be eliminated along with graduation examinations at six-year schools. To main­ tain the parity of the legal and medical professions, this meet­ ing also recommended that legal studies be opened under the same conditions as were being considered for the medical faculties.67 The next day, the Ministry of State held a long discussion about opening medical studies and the Kaiser's plans for the cadet academies. Studt and several other ministers stressed in purely educational terms the need for medical students who 66 Studt

to various professors of law, and their replies, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. 12, vol. IV. 6i Protocol of meeting of ζ April in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 11sE. On this meeting, see also Matthias, Im Zetchen der Schulreform, p. 43; and idem, Erlebtes und Zukunftsfragen aus Schulvenvaltung, Unterrtcht und Erztehung, p. 41. After this meeting, Althoff informed Seckendorff that legal studies would be open to Realgymnasium graduates within six months, "after the school conference has led to a satisfactory result": see Balschun, "Zum schulpolitischen Kampf," p. 93.

(2-74)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF I^OO

knew more science when they arrived at the university. When Miquel again objected to acting in this area before the results of the Frankfurt experiment were known, Studt informed him of the decision taken the previous day against a universal common foundation, noting "the special conditions, including the pupils," in Frankfurt, but not explicitly mentioning the percentage of Jewish pupils. A majority of the Prussian min­ isters eventually accepted the new regulations on medical stud­ ies, but the Kaiser did not fare so well. Studt reminded his colleagues that the ultimate decision on medical regulations rested with the Bundesrat and said that Wilhelm would have to be told this. With regard to legal careers for cadet academy graduates, Studt said he opposed breaking the parity between these schools and the Realgymnasien; contrary to the view adopted in his ministry the day before, he deferred to Schonstedt's statement that no change in existing rules should be made at that time. The ministers accepted his comments and delegated him to tell the Kaiser of their resistance to his wishes, which Studt presumably did when he saw Wilhelm on 4 ApriLi8 Studt again asked Hohenlohe to urge the Bundesrat to decide the question of medical privileges without waiting for com­ pletion of all the new regulations, as had recently been done with the issue of admitting women. But the Chancellor, no friend of the modern schools, did not even reply before the school conference met in early June.69 Between March and May the Ministry of Education solic­ ited scores of opinions on its proposals from teachers, pro­ fessors, and the Provincial School Authorities.70 In general, the memoranda submitted concentrated very closely on the 68 Protocol of 3 April 1900 in ZStA-II, Staatsministerium, Rep. 90a, Abt. B, Tit. Ill zb, no. 6, vol. 140; RA, 4 April 1900. Studt apparently succeeded in convincing Wilhelm not to make his planned announcement. *» Studt to Hohenlohe, 17 April 1900, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 129, vol. VI; Hohenlohe, Denkwtirdigkeiten des Reiehskanzlerzeit, p. 573. 70 These are gathered in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. IIJK, vols. I—VIIIj some are published in 1900, pp. 203-408.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

curricular and academic issues, with issues such as the over­ crowded professions, the "ballast," and overburdening no longer arousing a great deal of attention. The decisions against a universal common foundation and for strengthened Latin won general applause; the plans to delay Greek to Untersekunda and make it optional with English, however, were opposed by virtually all the Provincial School Authorities and most of the individuals polled. Individual opposition to the changes in the Gymnasium was led by Ulrich von Wilamowitz and Adolf von Harnack; the former would later write in his memoirs, "On that occasion Harnack and I saved Greek, of course before the conference, by negotiations with the ministry." As early as 26 March, before the definite decision to delay Greek that would be taken on ζ April, Wilamowitz had written to Althoff that rather than thus cripple the Gymnasium, it should be restored to its old curriculum and the universities opened completely to Realgymnasium graduates; he had no doubt that the classical Gym­ nasium would then "by free choice of the people, not by coercion," become "the school of the ruling classes." Wilamowitz grudgingly accepted the restriction to four years of Greek; but Harnack, agreeing that the Gymnasium's monop­ oly should fall, argued more strongly that surrender on this point should allow the classical school to keep six years of Greek. These opinions, combined with clear evidence that other German states were not going to reduce Greek to four years or make it optional, had their effect on Althoff: in late May, he told Hinzpeter that making Greek optional had been abandoned as "the major goal" of the projected reforms. Al­ though this question was listed first in the agenda for the conference, the question of equal privileges, originally listed eighth, was handled first.71 " Wilamowitz, My Recollections, p. 304; Wilamowitz to Althoff, 26 March, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. 12, vol. IV; 1900, pp. 203-218, 273-276; Althoff to Hinzpeter according to Balschun, "Zum schulpolitischen Kampf," p. 93; policy statement of 31 May in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115K. This personal influence on the change

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

To fit the Kaiser's schedule, 6 June was set for the opening of the formal deliberations that Wilhelm's interest in partic­ ipating had forced on Studt. Althoff controlled the choice of delegates, made only in the last week of May. Seven of the thirty-four men chosen represented other ministries, including three from the army—Funck, Seckendorff, and Count Kospoth. Also invited were five professors from the technical in­ stitutes, including the three representatives named to the House of Lords in 1898. Althoff chose ten university professors, including Wilamowitz, Harnack, Felix Klein, Wilhelm Dilthey, Theodor Mommsen, and Rudolf Virchow; this predom­ inance of professors at a conference to discuss secondary ed­ ucation reflected not only AlthofPs long ties with the universities, but also the shift of concern from reforming the curricula to revising the system of university and career privileges. Other than some of the representatives of the ministries, only six veterans of 1890 were invited: Hinzpeter, Virchow, Count Douglas, Oskar Jaeger, Hermann Kropatscheck, and Paul Albrecht. Althoff asked no radical reformers such as Hermann Goering or Paul Gussfeldt to attend; Konrad Schottmiiller had died in 1893 and thus was no longer a problem as an inde­ pendent link between the ministry and the Kaiser.71 Public response to rumors of a new school reform was not as vocal as it had been in 1890, yet the issue could still arouse intense hopes and fears. When the Tagliche Rundschau first reported Wilhelm's interest in a new reform, the conservative and clerical press reacted very negatively, fearing further "Americanization" of the schools. Hermann Kropatscheck and Ernst Heydebrand von der Lasa, the Conservatives' parliain plans to make Greek optional is confirmed in Agnes von Zahn-Harnack, Adolfvott Harnack (Berlin, 1936), pp. 310-311. Lucanus to Studt, 11 May 1900, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. IV; invitation list in no. 115K, vol. I. The other delegates from the technical institutes were Guido Hauck and Richard von der Borght; from the universities, Hermann Diels, Bernhard Weiss, Emil Fischer, and Wilhelm von Bezold. Goering did ask to be included in the conference: see his letter of 5 June in ibid., no. 115, vol. IV.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

mentary leader, expressed similar concern about the fate of humanistic Bildung in the House of Deputies.73 The Associ­ ation for Women's University Studies appealed that the higher girls' schools, which it called the "segment of the entire Prus­ sian school system most in need of reform," be discussed in the conference; but this request had no more success than had its predecessor in 1890.7* After the bifurcation plan became known through Althoff's solicitation of opinions, the reform organizations and the defenders of the Gymnasium both at­ tacked it. On 5 May, the School Reform Association, the Realschulmanner, the Association for Latin-less Secondary Schools, and the Engineers' Association issued a joint decla­ ration that called for both a universal common foundation and equal privileges for all nine-year schools; within ten days it attracted 13,000 signatures, and eventually it found 17,000 supporters.7' A separate plea simply for equal privileges for all nine-year schools, organized by the unusual pair of Alois Riedler and Wilhelm Vietor, attracted the signatures of eighty professors from the three technical institutes in Prussia, plus those of a handful of university professors who were asked to sign, including such longtime advocates of school reform as Friedrich Paulsen, Hermann Cohn, Dr. von Esmarsch, and Wilhelm Rein.76 On the same day as the joint meeting of the reform organ­ izations, the Kolntsche Zeitung, which served as Oskar Jae­ ger's mouthpiece in matters of secondary education, reported that the Gymnasium Association would not oppose equal priv­ ileges but would continue to fight for the old classical curric­ ulum against any plan for a common foundation, presumably 73 Kolnische Volks-Zeitung, 2.5 January 1900; Reichsbote, 27 February 1900; SB, XIX:2, pp. 2,681, 2,756 (10 and 12 March 1900). 74 Frankfurter Zeitung, 16 June 1900. 7! ZfR 12 (1900):1-2, 25-35; Zi. des Vereins Deutscher Ingenieure 44 (1900):556; PA 42 (1900):332-344, 381-384. 76 Riedler's petition of 29 March 1900, and Vietor to Althoff, 7 May, saying that only a few university professors were asked to sign it, in ZStAII, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, no. 13, vol. III.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

including Althoff's planned bifurcation. On 5 June, just one day before the conference was to open, a heavily attended convention of the Gymnasium Association in Braunschweig, guided by OskarJaeger and Paul Cauer, adopted a declaration saying that a modern common foundation would threaten humanistic Bildung and that "the Gymnasium has not the right, but the duty" to prepare boys for the universities, adding that other schools could also take on this duty. This Braun­ schweig Declaration was circulated more widely than the Hei­ delberg Declaration of 1888; eventually, it gained over 15,000 signatures. Of the 8,154 men who signed by the end of Sep­ tember, 2,098 were pastors, 2,987 teachers, 984 lawyers, and 567 physicians.77 Following this decision, which Jaeger carried to Berlin on a late train, and after the Kaiser's decision on the evening of 4 June not to attend the conference that he had forced on Studt,78 the deliberations became rather anticlimactic; they lasted only three days. Althoff had prepared things so well that, in Matthias's words, "it seemed as if there had been a dress rehearsal." Studt's opening speech followed Hinzpeter's recommendation and stressed the improvements in Prussian secondary education since 1890, even though Wilhelm was not there; he did point out, however, that the Kaiser's hopes for the greater diffusion of "modern knowledge" had not been completely fulfilled. The conference of 1890, Studt continued, had tried to meet this wish by including more modern subject 77 KolnischeZeitung, 5 May 1900; DhG xi (1900):105-124, zi j; Marcks, Oskar Jaeger, pp. 178-179. Jaeger was well informed of the current opinion in the Ministry of Education, for he told the meeting on 5 June that "the latest reports" were more favorable to "the humanistic cause." 78 The only explanation of Wilhelm's failure to attend, to my mind a be­ lievable one, comes from Paul Albrecht, who said that Wilhelm was warned off from associating himself as King of Prussia with the bifurcation plan that the other states would probably not adopt; with the memory of the attacks on him made in 1890, he might well have been dissuaded by such a prospect. Hinzpeter had apparently not passed on to Wilhelm Althoff's message that optional Greek was no longer the desired reform: see Sachse, Althoff, p. 324, and p. 284 of this study.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

matter in the Gymnasium [sic]; the time had come to abandon this path and increase the attractiveness of the modern schools by granting their graduates the same privileges as Gymnasium graduates. Hinzpeter spoke next, saying more accurately that the previous conference had faced an impossible task in trying to ease overburdening and increase modern knowledge with­ out ending the Gymnasium's monopoly; using the language of Friedrich Lange's Mass Petition, Hinzpeter said that no "thoroughgoing school reform" was possible as long as this monopoly remained. In a sharp reversal of his lifelong posi­ tion, Wilhelm's former tutor admitted that in the modern world the classics could no longer be the only source of Bil­ dung™ Given this firm lead, the delegates did not raise many ob­ jections to the official proposal to open the universities to graduates of all nine-year schools and institute preparatory courses at the universities to supply the linguistic knowledge, but not the Bildung, in Latin and Greek that Realgymnasium and Oberrealschule graduates might need for some studies. Several delegates expressed the hope that equal privileges would end the spirit of caste of the Prussian Gebildeten by producing a greater mixing of social classes in all three types of school. Jaeger's announcement of the resolution adopted by the Gym­ nasium Association the day before was greeted with bravos from all sides. Harnack raised a point presumably in every­ one's thoughts but seldom explicitly stated when he asked, "If today we permit even women with very diverse and du­ bious Bildung to attend all possible lectures at our universities, how can we prohibit young people who have truly learned to work during nine years at school from entering any studies that they want?"80 Yet Harnack, along with Mommsen, held out for requiring an extensive background in the ancient lan­ guages for law students because law professors wanted it. The 79 Matthias, Erlebtes, p. 11; 1900, pp. 1-4. In contrast to the use of several speakers with conflicting views for each question in 1890, Althoff had rep­ resentatives of the Ministry of Education lay out the pros and cons of each issue. 80 Ibid., pp. 12, 15, 25, 15, and 6-43, passim.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF I9OO

overwhelming majority of the delegates, however, voted in favor of a resolution in accord with the ministry's desires.81 Otto Meinertz of the Ministry of Education then presented the official position on the common foundation, recommend­ ing against its universal imposition but strongly supporting it where local authorities and teachers wanted it. Karl Reinhardt noted how the decision for equal privileges made the issue less important because irrevocable choices about future ca­ reers would no longer be made at age nine or ten; yet he stressed the importance of the common foundation for small towns. Funck, Seckendorff, and Christian Germar, Miquel's representative at the conference, pressed for a universal com­ mon foundation, but again the majority of the delegates sup­ ported the Ministry of Education.81 One day of discussion appeared to have resolved most of the problems that had troubled Prussian secondary education for the last thirty years. On the second day, Reinhold Kopke brought up Althoff's bifurcation plan without specifically advocating it; he noted that other states had made it clear that they would not cut Greek to four years or make it optional in their Gymnasien. Only one delegate voted against Wilamowitz's motion, "It is out of the question to allow English as an option for Greek, because it would destroy the Gymnasium"; delaying Greek until Untersekurtda found no support either, except for Reformgymnasien. In the course of defending the study of Greek, Wilamowitz repeated the views that he had advanced in 189Z about the passing of the ideal aesthetic conception of Greece that had animated Humboldt, suggesting that instruction should focus more on the historical roots of the modern world in classical antiquity than on the Greeks as moral and aesthetic models; yet most of the delegates remained true to the Hum*• Ibid., pp. 17, 33-34, 39-43· The representative of the Ministry of Justice said the next day that Latin and Greek would be considered necessary skills for Realgymnasium and Oberrealschule graduates who wanted to study law: ibid., p. 75. 11 Ibid., pp. 4j, 46, 6 1 , 71, 68, 73. Althoff called Germar, who handled the budget for education, "Geheimer Ober-Finanztyrann": Sachse, Althoff, P- 73·

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

boldtian vision.8' Althoff's interest in strengthening Latin at the Realgymnasium ran into difficulty, however, as those con­ tent with the current level, the military representatives who wanted just six years of it, and those such as Mommsen who still opposed the "impure" semiclassical school combined to defeat the proposed increase; Kropatscheck even reminded the conference of the Kaiser's attack on the Halbbildung of the Realgymnasium in 1890.84 The third and final day saw discussion of a variety of lesser issues. Hermann Diels noted how the current hatred for Eng­ land inspired by the Boer War had made the proposal to add English at the Gymnasium unpopular; but the general rec­ ognition of the importance of English as the "world language" led to a resolution allowing individual Gymnasien to make it obligatory.85 Neither the need for a more Germanized edu­ cation nor overburdening attracted much notice, although the military representatives did call for a greater commitment to sports than had developed in the 1890s. The six-year exam­ ination was unanimously condemned, with even the military not trying to defend it; the "ballast" still worried one delegate enough for him to suggest eliminating the one-year-volunteer privilege, but the conference did not give this any consider­ ation. Many delegates spoke for further improvements in the status and pay of secondary school teachers; Hinzpeter said that he had changed his mind since 1890 and now believed that teachers' pay should be on a par with that of judicial officials who had academic training of similar duration.86 The only squabble that arose came over Wilhelm's ideas about stressing imperial over republican Rome in history instruction, which Matthias espoused on behalf of the ministry. The oc­ togenarian democrat M o m m s e n claimed t h a t the t i H o f klatsch" of much of the imperial period was not valuable subject matter for the schools; but Harnack, known as a flat8>

1 9 0 0 , pp. 76-77, 97, 89-92.

8«

Ibid., pp. 98, 104-108, 123, 127, 122.

·' Ibid., pp. 137, 131—141; Germar said that money would be found for the teaching of English: ibid., p. 150. 66

Ibid., pp. 163, 169, 180, 185, and 150-198, passim.

(2.82)

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

terer of the Kaiser, defended Wilhelm's ideas by saying that such concentration on the Roman Empire would provide a better understanding of the early church. Wilamowitz stepped in to head off a counterattack by Mommsen, his father-inlaw; the conference went along with the proposed change of emphasis.87

AFTERMATH AGAIN

In closing the proceedings, Studt thanked the delegates for supporting the educational administration in its decisions, an accurate assessment of the conference of 1900. Yet as in 1890, these decisions were far from immediate implementation, and this time they did not have the Kaiser's seal of approval. That both Oskar Jaeger and Friedrich Lange could declare them­ selves satisfied with the outcome of the conference seemed to portend an easy path toward implementation of the resolu­ tions; yet the physicians' and lawyers' associations were still not eager to see the Gymnasium's monopoly broken. The strongest opposition to opening the universities to graduates of the semiclassical and modern schools came from the Su­ preme Council of the Prussian Evangelical church, which blundy refused to consider anything other than a traditional human­ istic education as the proper preparation for future pastors.88 Inasmuch as no school reformers had shown much interest in opening the theological faculties, however, this resistance was not crucial to the fate of the school reforms. Much more serious, at least temporarily, was the response of the Kaiser to the conference's resolutions: he did not think *» Ibid., pp. 129, 142, 145-147. The guidelines for history instruction drawn up before the conference had referred explicitly back to Wilhelm's remarks to Bosse in 1897: ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 115K, vol. IV. M Lange in Deutsche Welt, 8 July 1900; Jaeger in Kolttische Zeitung, 10 July 1900; polls of physicians and lawyers organized by the Badische Landeszeitung and the Deutsche Juristenzeitung reprinted in DhG 11 (1900):165200; protest of the Evangelischer Oberkirchenrat in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i, Gen. z, no. 115, vol. IV.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

that they went far enough in reforming the Gymnasium. As soon as the deliberations ended, Studt had sent Wilhelm a detailed report of the proceedings, emphasizing how the grant­ ing of equal privileges would contribute to his goal of a wider diffusion of modern knowledge. Wilhelm, however, had be­ lieved the conference was going to adopt the bifurcation plan that would make Greek optional, and through Hinzpeter in­ formed Studt of his displeasure.8» Studt and Althoff were not fully satisfied themselves, but for another reason: they had based their negotiations for opening the medical faculties on the prospect of increased Latin at the Realgymnasium, which the conference had rejected. On 30 June, they sent proposed curricula to the Provincial School Authorities that ignored the delegates' wishes by raising Latin at the Realgymnasium from forty-three to fifty credit hours, with a rise from sixty-two to sixty-eight hours at the Gymnasium; also against the rec­ ommendation of the conference, they proposed adding nine hours of obligatory English in the last three grades of the classical school. This was not well received, however, and was soon abandoned.'0 Only after receiving these and other responses to such pro­ posed changes did Studt again approach the Kaiser about the school reforms. At an audience on 29 October, Althoff aided Studt in convincing Wilhelm that equality for the three schools was the best reform attainable. Studt and Althoff then drafted a decree that, after winning the approval of the new Chan­ cellor, Bernhard von Bulow, they sent on to the Kaiser, who signed it at Kiel on 26 November.»1 The key portions of this decree read: 8» Studt to Kaiser, 8 July 1900, in ibid.; Hinzpeter's "Notiz betreffend die Klage des Kaisers iiber das Ergebnis der Schulkonferenz von 1900," in Brunkhorst, Einbeziehung der preussischen Schule in die Politik, p. 109. »° ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, no. 174, vol. I. »• Lucanus to Studt, 21 October, and Studt to Lucanus, 23 October, in ibid., no. 115F; Studt to Biilow, 11 November, Studt to the Kaiser, 20 No­ vember, and Lucanus to Studt, 27 November, in ibid., no. 115, vol. IV; Sachse, Althoff, pp. 74—75, 324-326.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

1. With regard to privileges, the Gymnasium, Realgymnasium, and Oberrealschule shall be considered as giving allgemeine Bildung of equal value, which it is only necessary to supplement insofar as many fields of study and careers require particular factual knowledge not included in the curriculum of each school, or not to the requisite degree. 2. By thus recognizing the equality of the three secondary schools, it will be possible to emphasize the particular na­ ture of each.... But, in view of the tremendous importance now attached to a knowledge of English, I place special importance on paying greater attention to this language at the Gymnasien. Therefore, English shall everywhere be of­ fered as an alternative to Greek through Untersekunda [for six-year leavers and for possible transfers to Realgymnasien]; where local conditions make it desirable, English shall replace French as an obligatory subject in the three upper grades. 3. . . . In history instruction there are still two weak points: the neglect of important segments of ancient history and the insufficient treatment of German history in the nine­ teenth century, with all its stirring memories and great achievements for our fatherland. 4. As the six-year examination has not fulfilled the ex­ pectations formed of it, and, in particular, instead of di­ minishing the rush of students to the university has rather added to it, it shall be abolished as soon as possible. 5. The establishment of schools following the Altona and Frankfurt curricula has on the whole proven beneficial to the areas where they exist.. .. I would like not only to see the experiment continued in an appropriate manner, but to have it extended where conditions warrant.91 Wilhelm's and Althoff's interest in extending the knowledge of English thus found an outlet even if neither the bifurcation plan nor obligatory English in the upper grades was intro­ duced. Saying that the six-year examination had failed to di»* Klaussmann, Kaiserreden, pp. 299-301.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

vert the "ballast" had some basis in fact, although the growth of the Realschulen had seemingly fulfilled the goals expressed in 1890; more important reasons for eliminating it were the burden that it put on sixteen-year-olds and the failure of the other states and the cadet academies to imitate it. Wilhelm probably failed to note the irony in his adopting in this decree the central thesis of Friedrich Paulsen's writings on school reform, that the ancient languages should be treated merely as tools for certain studies and not as a unique source of Bildung; Paulsen, so brusquely pushed aside by the Kaiser in 1890, had a quiet last laugh. Studt acted quickly within his own province to convert "Bildung of equal value" into equal privileges. On 25 Feb­ ruary 1901, he decreed that any Abiturient could take the teachers' certification examination in any subject. In May of 1901, the Bundesrat accepted the Prussian position that the medical profession should be opened to Realgymnasium grad­ uates, without any supplementary examination in Greek or in Latin; Oberrealschule graduates only had to take such an examination in Latin. Several Prussian ministers continued to resist opening legal studies and thus the upper civil service to nonhumanists, but with Wilhelm pressing for fulfillment of his decree, Studt and Schonstedt agreed on a formula that the Ministry of State accepted on 4 January 1902: graduates of all German Realgymnasien and of Prussian Oberrealschulen could study law and take civil service examinations in Prussia provided that they took it upon themselves to obtain "the linguistic and technical knowledge necessary for a clear un­ derstanding of Roman law." Althoff told the House of Dep­ uties that law students from the modern schools should ap­ proach the new two-semester course in introductory Greek at the universities with an attitude of "noblesse oblige." For the time being, Studt did not see fit to challenge the ecclesiastical authorities and left both the Protestant and the Catholic the­ ological faculties as exclusive preserves of Gymnasium grad­ uates." " Centralblatt, 1901, pp. 279—281; Studt to the Kaiser, 30 May 1901,

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

The other German states followed Prussia's lead in granting equality to all nine-year secondary schools only hesitatingly, with Baden and Hesse moving the fastest, Bavaria the slowest. The Bundesrat's decision about medical studies applied to all of Germany, of course; and as legal studies were gradually being opened to Oberrealschule graduates, their continued exclusion from medicine became more indefensible. In 1907, Althoff used the Progressive politician Richard Eickhoff to interest Chancellor Bulow in correcting this final anomaly in the reform of 1900; in contrast to his predecessor Hohenlohe, Biilow pushed hard in the Bundesrat to bring about this fur­ ther opening of the medical profession.94 The last measure that can be said to originate in the deliberations of 1900 was enacted in 1909, after Studt and Althoff had left office, when Prussia's secondary school teachers saw their desire for equal pay and rank with judicial officials fulfilled; within two years, the number of Abiturienten planning to become teachers had risen so drastically that there were renewed fears of a severe overcrowding of the profession.9' Althoff had said in 1899 that the Ministry of Education "did not think it advisable to hinder the development of schools other than the Gymnasium through the withholding of priv­ ileges."96 In the years between 1900 and 1914, it became very clear how great a hindrance the denial of equal privileges had been. Enrollment in the classical schools barely kept up with the growth in population in this period while the semiclassical discussions about opening legal studies, 19 March 1901, Lucanus to Studt, 30 September, Studt to Lucanus, 16 December, and Studt to Schonstedt, 19 December, in ZStA-II, KM, Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, no. 13, vol. IV; Studt to all university curators, 5 February 1901, and to the Kaiser, 5 May 1901, in ibid., Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, no. 12, vol. V; SB, XIX:4, pp. 4,922-4,923, 4,944. « Riese, Die Hochschule, p. 35; Quintin Steinbart, Die Durchfiihrung der preussischett Schulreform in ganz Deutsehland (Duisburg, 1907); Schmeding, Entwieklung des realistischen hoheren Schulwesens, pp. 186-191; Sachse, Althoff, p. 328; Eickhoff, Politisehe Profile, pp. 189-190. « Learned, The Oberlehrer, pp. 92, 109. SB, XIX:i, p. 1,382 (13 March 1899).

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

and modern schools grew substantially. This was most ob­ vious in the case of the Prussian Realgymnasien, which had declined in numbers and lost pupils ever since the failure to win medical privileges in 1883: between the school conference and the outbreak of war in 1914, the number of Realgym­ nasien increased from 76 to 187. The six-year Realprogymnasien, apparently headed for extinction during the late 1890s, recovered after the turn of the century, increasing from twentyone to forty-five schools; by 1911, enrollment in the semiclassical track had risen 126 percent, from the 23,000 of 1900 to 52,000. The modern track grew more modestly in the same period, but still enrolled 62 percent more pupils in eleven years; by 1914, the number of Oberrealschulen had risen from 37 to HI, of Realschulen from 138 to 180. In contrast, the number of classical schools increased by only thirteen, with forty-seven new Gymnasien being offset by the loss of thirtyfour Progymnasien, leaving 342 and twenty-five respectively; enrollment had grown just 14 percent by 1911, to 108,000. A majority of the new classical schools were in Catholic areas of the Rhineland and Westphalia, but it is not clear if this should be attributed more to the continuing Catholic loyalty to the traditional humanistic education or to the rapid pop­ ulation growth of this industrial region.»? Despite attracting less than half the secondary school pupils by 1911, the Gymnasien still supplied two-thirds of the grad­ uates in that year, so that the educational background of university students changed less drastically than the data on secondary enrollments would indicate. Yet Abiturienten from Realgymnasien and Oberrealschulen did not hesitate to take full advantage of the opportunities now open to them. Ex­ cluding the theological faculties, 15 percent of the students 97 Russell, German Higher Schools, p. 436; Schmeding, Entwicklung des realistischen hoheren Schulwesens, p. 216; Ringer, Education and Society, p. 272. Enrollment in the modern track in 1911 was 73,000. Of 640 nineyear schools, 342 were classical; of 250 six-year schools, only 25 were clas­ sical.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

entering German universities in 1913-1914 came from Oberrealschulen and 26 percent from Realgymnasien. The per­ centages were understandably highest for the philosophical faculties, with 22 percent from the modern and 31 percent from the semiclassical schools; lower for the medical faculties, at 12 and 25 percent; and lowest for the legal faculties that required the supplementary courses in the ancient languages, at 10 and 19 percent.»8 When one considers that the philo­ sophical faculties had been partially open to Realgymnasium graduates since 1870 and to Oberrealschule graduates since 1892, however, this lag in pursuing medical and legal studies is less striking. In little more than a decade, the new sources had come to supply 37 percent of the future physicians and 29 percent of the lawyers for the Reich. These new sources of students helped push total enrollment in the German uni­ versities up to 56,000 by 1911, almost twice the level of 1895. The expansion of the modern and semiclassical schools did not, however, produce a surge in enrollment in the technical institutes; these had quadrupled their enrollment from the low point of the mid-i88os to top 10,000 students at the turn of the century, but experienced only minimal growth thereafter despite the new status conferred on them by the Kaiser." The common foundation for all forms of secondary school­ ing prospered after the decisions of the conference and the Kaiser's decree. The fact that all but one of sixty-one pupils at the Gymnasium and two Realgymnasien in Frankfurt that had adopted this structure passed the Abitur in 1901 served to encourage its establishment elsewhere; by 1914,139 of 599 classical and semiclassical schools in Prussia did not start Latin until Untertertia.1°° Financial considerations may well have »* Monatsschrift fiir hoheren Schulett 13 (1914):119-131, 289-291, 513515; ibid. 14 (1915):483-485. »»Ringer, Education and Society, p. 291; Jiirgen Kocka, Unternehmensverwaltung und Angestelltenschaft am Beispiel Siemens (Stuttgart, 1969), p. 472. 100 Kdlnische Volkszeitung, 10 April 1901; Helmut Sienknecht, Der Einheitsschulgedanke (Weinheim, 1968), p. 138.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 19ΟΟ

influenced this development more than either the pedagogical or social benefits that had originally motivated supporters of the common foundation; but for many pupils the choice of track could be delayed, and with Bosse's restrictions on the adoption of the new structure removed, the small towns with just one school could take advantage of the common foun­ dation. The modern common foundation won its greatest success in the girls' secondary schools, where after 1908 it became the standard structure. The girls' schools had again not been discussed at the Prussian school conference, but its decisions led directly to the dropping of Greek from Helene Lange's classical course in Berlin.101 By 1906, fifty-three of the 111 Abiturientinnen from Lange's course had studied or were studying medicine, but in Prussia these young women were still in the anomalous position of being forced to rely on professors' permission to audit their courses. In that year, initiatives stemming from the Kaiserin and Friedrich Althoff led to a conference on girls' education that attempted to rem­ edy this situation and to bring greater uniformity to the in­ creasing number of classical and semiclassical schools for girls. By this time, most women teachers had come to prefer the six-year course of the Frankfurt Reformgymnasium to the four-year program following graduation from a higher girls' school that was used in Berlin, because the latter required girls to spend fourteen years to obtain an Abitur rather than the twelve or thirteen years that boys spent. Although the con­ ference was divided on this issue, new curricula issued in 1908 established six-year Gymnasien and Realgymnasien and fiveyear Oberrealschulen for girls, designed to follow seven or eight years in a higher girls' school. Starting essentially from scratch, these "academic institutions" (Studienanstalten) for young women bore out Friedrich Paulsen's belief that the semiclassical school was the most appropriate for Germany ίο· Vereinigung zur Veranstaltung von Gymnasialkursen, Geschichte der Gymnasialkurse, pp. 57-58.

SCHOOL CONFERENCE OF 1900

in the early twentieth century: by 1913, there were fifty-one Realgymnasien for girls in Prussia, compared to only eleven Oberrealschulen and nine Gymnasien. On the eve of World War I, women already comprised 7 percent of German uni­ versity students.102 101 Ibid.,

pp. 79-82; Kasuya, Secondary Education of Girls, pp. 52-53; Sachse, Altboff, pp. 340-356; Lange, Lebenserinnerungen, pp. 245-253; Beckmann, Mddchenbildung, p. 89; McClelland, State, Society, and Univer­ sity, p. 250.

NINE

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Y 1908, all

holders of an Abitur, whether male or female, whether from a classical, semiclassical, or modern school, could matriculate at any German university, even if cer­ tain fields such as theology continued to require specific prep­ aration. The semiclassical and modern schools were experi­ encing a substantial rate of growth as the secondary system increased its inclusiveness at the most rapid rate since 1870, and perhaps ever. For a significant fraction of boys and all girls, die modern common foundation for all secondary schools now allowed the delay of tracking until age twelve or thirteen. Although individuals such as Friedrich Paulsen, Quintin Steinbart, Friedrich Lange, and Helene Lange may have considered the reforms that produced this situation to have been long overdue, the German schools had seemingly adapted success­ fully to the needs of the early twentieth century. Several other measures can be used to gauge the extent of this success. One is the rapid waning of hostility between the reformers and the defenders of the Gymnasium, indicated most clearly perhaps by the fact that in 1904 Friedrich Paulsen could be the featured speaker at the first meeting of an or­ ganization embracing teachers from all secondary schools, including Gymnasien.1 Another measure of the success of the school reforms around 1900 is their duration: not only were no major structural innovations introduced before 1914, but even the Social Democratic Prussian governments of the Wei­ mar Republic did not overthrow the equally privileged tracks that emerged during the Second Reich. The Republic did see the abolition of the Vorschulen and the creation of another nine-year track (the German Oberschule) and of a pathway for elementary school graduates to continue their education

B

1 Paulsen,

Autobiography, p . 4 1 1 . (Z92)

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

and prepare for the universities (the Aufbauschule), but when Hitler became Chancellor in 1933 the Gymnasium, Realgymnasium, and Oberrealschule were still the dominant forms of secondary education. As argued in the introduction, the comparison of the issues, politics, and results of secondary school reform in this period with contemporaneous events in other European countries can also provide a useful measure of the success or failure of the "modernization" of German secondary education.* The most direct comparisons can be made with France, although even there several idiosyncracies of the educational system com­ plicate any parallels. The existence of the Ecole Polytechnique and the other grandes ecoles at the pinnacle of the French school system had given advanced technical studies a higher prestige than they enjoyed in Germany during the nineteenth century, but this had not aided the growth of independent modern secondary schools such as the Realgymnasium and the Oberrealschule. After an unhappy experience in the 1850s with a bifurcation of the lycee into two tracks after the third year, the single classical track had regained its position as a comprehensive preparatory school for all future studies; the major Paris lycees created special sections for pupils aiming at the grandes ecoles.' When Victor Duruy abolished bifur­ cation in 1864, he also created a new modern track known as "special secondary education," which was designed to last four years, but offered no career privileges; the majority of the pupils who began the special secondary course did not even remain for the full four years.4 France thus had, in the 1870s and 1880s, no equivalent of the Realgymnasium and * Such comparisons necessarily rely mainly on secondary sources. The sta­ tistical information in Ringer's Education and Society in Modem Europe aids the precision of these comparisons, but does not alter the conclusions reached in an earlier version of this study submitted as a Ph.D. dissertation at Yale University in December 1976. ' Anderson, Education in France, pp. 67-72, 98-105, 172.—173. 4 Ibid., p. 211; Anderson, "Secondary Education in Mid-Nineteenth-Century France," pp. 129,132; C. R. Day, "Technical and Professional Education in France," Journal of Social History 6 (1972-1973):189-190, 186-187.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

no lobbying organization like the Realschulmanner pressing for reform of the educational system. Yet the same demands of the present as in Germany brought changes to the lycee that paralleled what happened to the Gymnasium. Between 1863 and 1880, especially during the ministries of Duruy and Jules Simon, foreign languages, sci­ ence, history, and French received more hours in the curric­ ulum; Latin and Greek lost time and written work in the ancient languages was reduced.' This piling on of additional material in an effort to maintain a comprehensive secondary school quickly aroused a public outcry about the overbur­ dening of pupils that, if not as widespread as across the Rhine, produced a quicker response from the government. In 1885 and again in 1890, the educational authorities made sharp reductions in the total of classroom hours at the lycee, leaving pupils with an average of twenty-three rather than twentynine hours a week of classes.6 In contrast to the Prussian Gymnasium curriculum of 1892, however, Latin and Greek suffered no further losses in these revisions, so that the efforts to ease overburdening amounted to a renunciation of Duruy's aim of a comprehensive lycee. This renunciation necessitated the continuation of a gradual elevation of the special secondary schools that mirrored the earlier evolution of the Prussian Biirgerschulen and RealschuIen into Realgymnasien and Oberrealschulen. The special sec­ ondary course had been extended to five years in 1881 and to six in 1886, one year after the first reductions in the time allotted for modern subjects at the lycee. In 1886, the baccalaureat for this program began to offer the privilege of com­ peting for entry to the Ecole Polytechnique and St. Cyr, study­ ing in the forestry schools, and studying and teaching modern ' Anderson, Education in France, pp. 180-182; Simon, La reforme de Venseignement secondaire, pp. 43, 302-312; Clement Falcucci, L'humanisme dans I'enseignement secondaire en France au XIX' siecle (Toulouse and Paris, 1939), pp· 311,341-341· * Antoine Prost, Histoire de I'enseignement en France, 1800-1967 (Paris, 1969), p. 251; Falcucci, L'humanisme, pp. 381, 411-412.

(2-94)

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

languages and science; it thus provided rights similar to those enjoyed by Realgymnasium graduates after 1870 and Oberrealschule graduates after 1890. In 1891, after the second reduction in hours for modern subjects at the lycee, Leon Bourgeois dropped the somewhat derogatory label of "spe­ cial" and renamed the nonclassical schools "modern second­ ary education," renumbering the classes to match the system in the lycee.7 French secondary education thus entered the 1890s with a structure very close to what would have existed in Prussia had the conference of 1890 succeeded in abolishing the Realgymnasium. Concern with the "ballast" in the lycee, which the French often referred to as the "lame," had also contributed to the creation of modern secondary education in France. However, the relatively rapid growth of the modern track during the 1890s did not totally eliminate complaints about the dead wood taking up space in the classical schools, just as the expansion of the Realschulen failed to quiet concern about the "ballast."8 The 1890s rather than the 1880s witnessed the major upsurge in concern about an academic proletariat in France, which, in contrast to Germany, included the many boys who completed the lycee but then failed the baccalaureat or one of the competitions for entrance to the grandes ecoles. Contemporaries also viewed a new conscription law that guar­ anteed university students only one year of military service without requiring them to pay for their maintenance as vol­ unteers to be aggravating the production of an excess of un­ employed academics and professionals in these years.9 In 1899, the French legislature, which took a more activist role in secondary school reform than the Prussian House of Deputies or the Reichstag ever did, established the Ribot Com1 Prost,

Histoire de I'enseignement, p. 254. La refortne de I'enseignement secondaire, pp. 285-286, 72, 215; Gabriel Compayre, "The Reform in Secondary Education in France," Edu­ cational Review 25 (1903):136. » Ribot, La reforme, p. 74; David B. Ralston, The Army of the Republic (Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1967), pp. 40-42, 104, 303. 8 Ribot,

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

mission to study possible reforms. Three years later, the gov­ ernment introduced a major restructuring of the schools, which did not agree entirely with the recommendations of the Com­ mission. The lycees and colleges would henceforth consist of two cycles, similar to the break in the German schools pro­ duced by the granting of the one-year-volunteer privilege and other rights after Untersekunda. In the first four-year cycle, pupils could choose between tracks with or without Latin; in the final three years they had the option of sections labeled "Latin-Greek," "Latin-modern languages," "Latin-sciences," and "sciences-modern languages," all of which bestowed equal privileges. The new structure was thus virtually identical with the trifurcation after Obertertia that Althoff had proposed in 1898, although at that time he had not been ready to extend full equality to the modern track.10 The granting of equal privileges led to a more rapid flight from Greek in France than in Prussia: by 1910, only 19 percent of the candidates for the baccalaureat came from the LatinGreek section, compared to 25 percent from Latin-languages, 22 percent from Latin-sciences, and 34 percent from sciencelanguages.11 No statistics were kept on enrollments in the separate tracks, but it would be safe to assume that the modern course attracted a somewhat higher percentage of pupils than it supplied candidates for the baccalaureat, because it was likely to have a higher dropout rate than the others. If one regards the granting of equal privileges as a ploy to make the classical schools more exclusive, France was much more suc­ cessful in this effort to recreate an elite institution than Prussia was. If, however, the extension of privileges to the semiclassical and modern tracks is interpreted as a proper response to changing educational needs and demands, the flight from Greek in France suggests that the classical lycee had been more out of tune with its clientele than the Gymnasium had been. Only if one adopts the position that no pupils should have •° Frederic Farrington, French Secondary Schools (London, 1910), pp. 125126. " Isambert-Jamati, "Une reforme des lycees et colleges," p. 50.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

learned Greek in the early twentieth century can the French reform be seen as producing more positive results than the German. The new French regulations of 1902 failed to stimulate anything approaching the increased enrollment that the Prus­ sian secondary schools enjoyed after 1900. Including the pri­ vate secondary schools for boys, French enrollments rose only from about 113,000 in 1898 to ιζο,οοο in 1911; inclusiveness, which had reached 2.4 percent of the age group in 1875, was still only 2.6 percent in 1911, compared with 3.2 percent in Prussia for an age group extending to age nineteen rather than seventeen. When one considers that fewer pupils gen­ erally dropped out in France than in Germany, these figures suggest that a significantly larger portion of German than French youth had the opportunity to begin a secondary ed­ ucation on the eve of World War I.11 Nineteenth-century England, with no state system of sec­ ondary education, and thus no fixed curricula or reliable sta­ tistics on enrollments, offers less fertile ground for comparison with the German solution to the school question; yet several interesting similarities and differences are discernible. The first parliamentary inquiry into the great public schools, the Clar­ endon Commission of the early 1860s, concluded that the retention of the ancient languages as the core of secondary education was "a service which far outweighs the error of having clung to these studies too exclusively"; yet it also found the results attained in Latin and Greek to be "in many cases most unsatisfactory." This judgment was similar to the views of many of the Gymnasium's critics in the 1870s. The Taunton Commission of the late 1860s, investigating the condition of all other endowed secondary schools, especially "deplored... the inadequate provision for the teaching of science or modern languages," again expressing an opinion similar to those being raised in Germany. The influence of Matthew Arnold's praise of the Prussian schools at this time can be seen in the Taunton " Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 145, 152, 132.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Commission's recommendation of a tripartite division of the secondary schools into institutions that would have resembled the Prussian Gymnasium, first-class Realschule, and higher Burgerschule of that day.1' No decisive government interven­ tion into secondary education resulted from the reports of these two commissions, however; no modern schools were created. The formation of the Headmasters' Conference in 1870 demonstrated the interest of educators in keeping their own house sufficiently in order to prevent the government from stepping in, a luxury not available to teachers in France, Germany, or Russia. Less ink was spilled in debate of the school question in England than in Germany during the last three decades of the century, but the three main issues that developed in Germany also found an audience in England. The Taunton Commission itself had pointed to the need for shorter modern schools for the English equivalent of the "ballast" in the classical schools. Incredible as it seems, the 1880s and 1890s even saw grave worries about a surplus of graduates coming from Oxford and Cambridge.1·» As noted in chapter 4, some concern about overburdening arose in the 1880s as well, but the manliness cult of these years probably generated more of an excess of sport than of academic work in the schools. It also created an atmosphere in which "the virtues of loyalty and pride in one's unit were fostered by rousing school songs, Old Boy Associations, and annual dinners concluding with patriotic speeches."1' Such chauvinism necessarily developed without government directives; in a country without a major socialist movement and less political violence than most others, the •> H. C. Barnard, A History of English Education from ιγ6ο (2d ed.; London, 1961), pp. 117-134; W.H.G. Armytage, Four Hundred Years of English Education (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 127-129. '« Sheldon Rothblatt, The Revolution of the Dons (New York, 1968), pp.

*59-171· •s David Newsome, Godliness and Good Learning (London, 1961), pp. 83, 200; Bamford, Rise of the Public Schools, p. 83.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

nationalist preachings of these years were less explicitly di­ rected at the working class. The Bryce Commission of 1895, another parliamentary cre­ ation, was the first to look at secondary education in Great Britain in its entirety. Compared to the Ribot Commission and the Prussian school conferences, it concentrated much more on the provision and organization of secondary edu­ cation and much less on curricular matters. A measure of the lack of progress in meeting the demands of the present in England was the fact that the Bryce Commission could rec­ ommend the same tripartite division of schools that the Taun­ ton Commission had proposed in vain thirty years before. It called for "parity of esteem" among the three types; but when only the first type gave adequate preparation for the entrance examinations at Oxford and Cambridge, such rhetoric was no more meaningful than the resolution calling for "as equal a valuation as possible of modern and humanistic Bildung" passed by the Prussian school conference of 1890.16 Not until 1902 did the English Parliament finally create a fixed role for the state in the provision of secondary education, although even now only through the medium of the Local Education Authorities. Rather than adopting the recommen­ dations of the Bryce Commission, the new legislation divided the secondary schools into "grammar" and "modern" types for the purpose of dispensing grants for science instruction. The number of "recognized" schools receiving such grants rose from 482 in 1903-1904 to 684 in 1905-1906, as local­ ities strove to create or restructure schools to meet the criteria for state aid, in much the same way that the Prussian Realschulen had been shaped by the requirements for privileges set in 1832 and 1859. By 1912, 885 English secondary schools were receiving grants; of these, 183 taught both Greek and Latin, 574 taught Latin but not Greek, and only 128 offered neither ancient language.17 The English schools thus did not " Kazamias, Politics, Society and Secondary Education, pp. " Ibid., p p . 1 2 1 , 1 4 7 , 2 0 3 .

21, 36,

68.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

develop as large a modern track as did the French and German, even though Greek did not fare much better than it did in France. Historians of English education generally agree that the new secondary schools were modeled too closely after the public schools, especially when most of them did not aim at preparing pupils for university studies.18 The lack of a clear definition of secondary education until 190Z complicates the calculation of levels of inclusiveness. Ringer estimates that in 1870 only 2 percent of fourteen-yearolds and ι percent of seventeen-year-olds were receiving in­ struction that in some way went beyond the elementary level. By the turn of the century, these figures had risen to 9 percent of fourteen-year-olds and 2 percent of seventeen-year-olds, indicating a somewhat higher level of inclusiveness in England than in France or Germany. Yet in a country where the ele­ mentary schools had been so deficient until late in the century, many pupils attending the lesser English secondary schools cannot be considered as receiving the equivalent of a conti­ nental secondary education, but rather an English version of French higher primary schooling or of instruction at a German Mittelschule. Few grammar-school graduates chose to con­ tinue their studies at universities, whereas most Abiturienten and an increasing percentage of bacheliers did so, which in­ dicates again that secondary education did not necessarily mean the same thing in different countries.19 In Russia, the classical Gymnasium suffered during the 1850s from the belief that the pagan classics contributed to revo­ lutionary sentiments, but by the mid-18 60s the Gymnasium was on its way to establishing a monopoly over preparation for the universities. In the late 1860s, municipal authorities began to press for the opening of the universities to graduates •" Ibid., p. 130; E.J.R. Eaglesham, The Foundations of Twentieth Century Education in England (New York, 1967), pp. 56-59; Bamford, Rise of the Public Schools, p. 258. " Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 240-223. Armytage suggests that only 4.4 percent of English youth attended grammar schools in 1910: Four Hundred Years, p. 207.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

of Realgymnasien, at the same time that Posen and other Prussian towns were dispatching their first petitions to the legislature; as in Prussia later on, the Minister of War, Miliutin, was a strong advocate of such a modernization of the educational system. Yet under Dmitri Tolstoi, Russian sec­ ondary education evolved into the dualism of classical and modern schools that Treitschke, the Mommsens, and Bonitz advocated in Germany in the 1870s. The Russian Realschule did bestow the privilege of studying in various technical in­ stitutes, but its graduates could not study at the universities. As of 1887, the classical track enrolled 71,000 pupils, the modern only 21,000.10 The Russian Gymnasium suffered from problems with a "ballast" very much as its Prussian cousin did; the authorities regarded the two-thirds of Gymnasium pupils who did not graduate as "the cannon fodder of anarchy." One of the meas­ ures adopted to try to move this "ballast" out of the classical schools was to establish six-year urban schools that were sig­ nificantly better than the rural elementary schools.11 During the 1880s, some officials also worried about an academic proletariat likely to turn to nihilism, although there is less evidence of an oversupply of graduates, especially teachers, in Russia than in Germany. Enrollment in the Gymnasien declined from 1881 to 1894, but then grew rapidly again after the mid-i890s in much the same pattern as in Germany.11 In 1890, the desire to retain a comprehensive Gymnasium com­ bined with an interest in easing overburdening to produce reduction in the time devoted to Greek and a de-emphasis of grammar instruction that mirrored the steps taken after the Prussian school conference of 1890. In 1901, this was fol­ lowed by a delay in the beginning of Latin and Greek in the 10Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, pp. 23, 134, 99, 150, 135, 142; Alston, Education and the State, pp. 76, 86, 95-96, 124. 11 Ibid., pp. 123,127-130; Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, pp. 201, 216; McClelland, Autocrats and Academics, pp. 14-16. " Ibid., p. 16.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Gymnasium that amounted to introduction of a universal common foundation for all secondary schools.1' At the time of the Russian Revolution of 1905, the modern Realschulen attracted only half as many pupils as the Gymnasien. In the wake of the Revolution, new regulations spurred an explosion in the number of private Gymnasien, from seven in 1905 to 1Z7 in 1911; with the sixty-nine public classical schools, Russia still possessed fewer than 200 Gymnasien. These regulations also allowed for the elimination of Greek, partly to make room for greater attention to handicrafts and physical fitness; Greek quickly disappeared from "all but a handful of schools." Latin, however, "remained an indispen­ sable requirement for entrance to a university," so that the Realschulen in Russia did not gain the privileges that the modern track in Germany did after the turn of the century.24 In the field of secondary education for girls, all the problems besetting comparisons of boys' schools exist in compounded form. None of the countries possessed girls' schools equivalent in length and curriculum to those for boys during the late nineteenth century; interestingly, the closest approach to equality may well have been in Russia, where 45 percent of secondary pupils were girls. German women lagged behind their Euro­ pean sisters in penetrating the universities, failing to match the piecemeal intrusion of women into French higher educa­ tion from the 1860s onward, the opening of Girton and Newnham Colleges at Cambridge in the 1870s, or the creation of various forms of higher education for Russian women that aimed at keeping them from being radicalized while studying in Switzerland.15 While German women composed 7 percent of university students in 1914, French women had already climbed to 10 percent. Yet enrollments in public secondary schools, including the elementary classes, were much higher *' Sinel, The Classroom and the Chancellery, p. 175; Alston, Education and the State, p. i6z. •« Ibid., pp. 160, 166, 106; McClelland, Autocrats and Academics, p. 34. Edmee Charrier, L'evolution intellectuelle feminine (Paris, 1931), pp. 94-95; Stock, Better Than Rubies, pp. 143-146.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

in Germany than in France, with 157,000 pupils attending higher girls' schools in 1906 compared to 35,000 at girls' lycees in 1908; but these figures do not include the many private schools for girls in France. English girls entered sec­ ondary education in large numbers only after the Education Act of 1902; enrollments reached 185,000 by 1917. In Russia, slightly over 304,000 girls received some form of secondary education on the eve of World War 1.16 Until more research is done on the education of girls and women in this period of European history, German success in providing increased ed­ ucational opportunities cannot be measured accurately, al­ though it is clear that Germany was catching up after lagging far behind in opening the universities to women. On the surface, Germany's lead in pedagogical reforms ap­ pears indisputable at the turn of the century, especially when one considers how the French and English observers had stressed the superiority of German teachers and methods even before the upsurge of interest in better teaching during the 1880s. In Russia, interest in scientific pedagogy "had lain practically fallow" until the 1890s; the Moscow Pedagogical Society was founded only in 1898. France did not institute any required courses in pedagogy for future secondary teachers until 1902; if Emile Durkheim's lectures at the Ecole Normale Superieure were typical, these new courses stressed the history of edu­ cation much more than teaching methods. In England, the Bryce Commission recommended professional training for teachers in the mid-1890s, but popular interest in educational psychology and teaching methods emerged only after the turn of the century.27 16 Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 147, 295, 275, 316; James Oliphant, "Secondary Education of Girls in France," Great Britian Board of Education, Special Reports on Educational Subjects (London, 1911), 24:412; Josephine Kamm, Hope Deferred (London, 1965), p. 233; McClelland, Autocrats and Academics, p. 35. 17 Alston, Education and the State, pp. 141,156; Viviane Isambert-Jamati, "La formation pedagogique des professeurs a la fin du dix-neuvieme siecle," Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 67 (i97o):esp. 270-273; Barnard, History of English Education, pp. 206, 220-221. Some foreigners,

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Yet the reemergence of the bitter controversy about over­ burdening and the burgeoning of the youth movement in the first decade of the new century suggest that all the interest in better teaching had not produced pupils who felt any more favorably about their schools. The school novels discussed in chapter 2 carried the issues and a new concern with youth to a wide public as suicides and unfit volunteers again became hotly debated topics. Frequently at the center of the storm was Ludwig Gurlitt of the Steglitz Gymnasium, who crossed pens with Friedrich Paulsen—now a defender of the status quo—on several occasions.18 The harsh tones of Gurlitt and other new critics stand in sharp contrast to the impression of educational peace and prosperity one gets from looking at the general satisfaction of the older combatants with the com­ promise of 1900. Although other countries also experienced youth revolts in various forms in the first years of the century, the disaffection of youth appears to have been greatest in Germany; if the secondary schools cannot be held entirely to blame for the perceived failings of the adult world in the Second Reich, the school reforms of this era certainly did little to diminish the alienation felt by their pupils.19 Comparing the effects of the new nationalist preachings in the schools is even more difficult than measuring pedagogical improvements, especially when the effects in Germany are themselves subject to controversy. Did the reform of secondat least, still admired German secondary teachers on the eve of World War I: see Price Collier, Germany and the Germans from an American Point of View (New York, 1914), p. 247. l" See esp. Ludwig Gurlitt's Der Deutsche und seine Schule and his Schulerselbstmorde (Berlin, 1908); and Friednch Paulsen's replies in the essays "Schuljammer und Jugend von heute" and "Vater und Sohne" in his Gesammelte padagogstche Abhandlutigen. On the renewed controversy about unfit volunteers, see Neuendorff, Geschiehte der neueren deutsehen Leibesubung, 4:357. 19 See Phyllis Stock, "Students versus the University in Pre-World War Paris," French Historical Studies 7 (1971):93-110; and John R. Gillis, "Con­ formity and Rebellion: Contrasting Styles of English and German Youth, 1900-1933," History of Education Quarterly 13 (1973):243-260.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

ary education under Wilhelm II serve merely to produce "an expanded means for consolidating the existing power struc­ ture," or, as Konrad Jarausch has recently said of the German universities in this period, did liberal education serve as "il­ liberal socialization"?50 That most secondary school teachers tried to raise loyal, patriotic Germans cannot be doubted; neither can one deny that after the curricular revisions fol­ lowing Wilhelm's Cabinet Order of ι May 1889 the three hours per week of German history in Untersekunda and Oberprima included promonarchical and antisocialist themes. Yet the fact that the more active efforts at indoctrination in the elementary schools failed to stem the rise in the socialist vote before 1914 suggests caution in attributing the political atti­ tudes of German university students to the specifics of history instruction in the Gymnasien. The rightward shift in these attitudes, away from the liberalism of the mid-nineteenth cen­ tury, had predated Wilhelm's decrees in any event, as evi­ denced by the foundation of the anti-Semitic German Stu­ dents' League in 1881.'1 Beyond question with regard to this issue is the Kaiser's own dissatisfaction with what had been achieved in the quarter century before 1914: during the war he revived his plans for teaching modern history before ancient, and in both volumes of his memoirs written in the 1920s he asserted that the school reform had not worked out as he had hoped.5* Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf also contains many scathing comments about the woeful inadequacy of history instruction in German schools, although how accurate a knowledge of German schools the '° Heydorn and Koneffke, Bildungsgeschichtedes deutschen Imperialisms, p. 38; Jarausch, "Liberal Education as Illiberal Socialization," Journal of Modem History 50 (1978):609-630. »• See McClelland, State, Society,and University, pp. 314-311, for a recent effort to explain the changing political atmosphere in German universities after unification. Konrad Jarausch, Students, Society,and Politics in Imperial Germany (Princeton, 1982), explores this issue in much greater depth. >* Klaus Goebel, "Des Kaisers neuer Geschichtsunterricht," Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 25 (1974):709-717; Wilhelm II, Aus meinem Leben, p. 34; idem, Ereignisse und Gestalten, p. 153.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

dropout from an Austrian Realschule could have had is ques­ tionable. Both the ex-Kaiser and the future Fiihrer knew in the mid-i920s that what political indoctrination there had been before World War I had not prevented 75 percent of German voters from choosing the democratic parties of the Weimar coalition in January 1919. This fact has too often been forgotten by historians who make too easy a connection between the educational policies of the Second Reich and the rise of the Third. The Prussian school conferences of 1890 and 1900 also demonstrate the importance of distinguishing "hurrah patri­ otism" from volkisch thinking in the style of Lagarde, Langbehn, and Lietz; the latter clearly had not penetrated the main­ stream of educational thought at that time. The Prussian Ministry of Education did allow other educators to imitate Lietz's country boarding school, and it never tried to suppress the Wandervogel as it had schoolboy fraternities; yet the very existence of these movements, defined in opposition to the spirit and structure of traditional secondary education, sug­ gests the extent of difference between the nationalism of the establishment and the radicals. Peter Merkl's study of auto­ biographies of early Nazis also downplays the importance of volkisch teachers in this period, concluding that "most of the volkisch teaching must have occurred during and after World War I."33 As a case study in German society and politics in the late nineteenth century, the debate of the school question both confirms and challenges Fritz Ringer's notion of a "mandarin elite" of university graduates reacting negatively to their loss of status in an emerging industrial society. The resistance of physicians, lawyers, and architects to opening their profes­ sions to "nonhumanists," based so largely on fears of losing status, demonstrates how strong a sense of caste had devel­ oped among Gebildeten in Imperial Germany. The over» Peter Merkl, Political Violence under the Swastika (Princeton, 1975), p. 308.

(306 )

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

crowding of the professions in the 1880s illustrates not only how attractive life as a mandarin had become for the German middle classes, but also how the structure and ideology of the educational system made those young men trained for the professions unable and unwilling to consider other careers— a state of affairs not unique to Imperial Germany. Defense of social status does not account for all interest in defending the educational status quo in these years, though; educational conservatives also considered their rallying around the Gym­ nasium to be a stand for liberal education against nationalist excesses and demands for premature specialization. If the con­ servatives' tendency to equate the Realschulen with materi­ alism or Americanization indicated a failure to perceive what these schools had the potentiality to become, their belief that allgemeine Bildung should precede, or at least accompany, practical training had and still has validity, and cannot be dismissed as merely an expression of class interest. Further complicating this picture of the educated elite hos­ tile to modernity is the fact that social position and educa­ tional background did not always determine attitudes toward the secondary schools. Friedrich Lange, Emil Hartwich, Paul Hasse, Paul Gussfeldt, Konrad Schottmiiller, Johannes Miquel, Franz Adickes, Hermann Lietz, and all the early leaders of the Realschulmanner Association were Gebildeten of the purest sort, graduates of classical Gymnasien and German universities. Friedrich Paulsen, Rudolf Virchow, Wilhelm Preyer, Hermann Grimm, and all the signers of Carl Ludwig's petition in 1890 were university professors; Friedrich Althoff himself had been a professor of law before entering the Ministry of Education. These apostates from the classical tradition did more to frame the arguments and create the organizations favoring secondary school reform than did representatives of commerce and industry: although many German industrialists supported expansion of the modern schools by backing the Realschulmanner, serving on local school boards, and signing petitions, only Theodor Peters and the Engineers' Association consistently played an active role in the agitation for reform.

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Most calls for modernizing secondary education did not even make explicit reference to the needs of industry for boys trained in specific fields: most reformers were willing to leave practical training until after formal schooling ended, but wanted a Bildung that cultivated interests and habits of thought more ap­ propriate to the industrial and commercial world than the study of ancient languages did. The Kaiser himself was a leading apostate from the classical tradition in which Hinzpeter had educated him, without ever being hostile to the study of antiquity itself. Wilhelm's actions on behalf of school reform may not demonstrate his "personal rule," but they were crucial to the entire sequence of events after his accession. The Cabinet Order of ι May 1889, what­ ever its long-term effects on German politics, led to the reform of the cadet academies that probably caused Gossler to ad­ vocate the school conference of 1890 as a means to temper Wilhelm's demands. At that meeting, the Kaiser's concern about overburdening led to a greater reduction in class hours than had been planned and sealed the fate of the Latin essay as a basis for promotion; his impulsive attack on the Realgymnasium, even if never carried through in practice, caused the delegates to vote overwhelmingly in favor of eliminating the semiclassical schools, against the wishes of the Ministry of Education. In 1891, Wilhelm's intervention in the minis­ terial squabbling about privileges for the modern schools en­ abled Zedlitz to succeed where Gossler had so often failed in his efforts to make these schools attractive enough to lure the "ballast" from the Gymnasium. The Kaiser's interest in sci­ ence and technology led directly to the heightened prestige of the technical universities in 1898 and 1899; his interest in another Gymnasium reform and privileges for cadet academy graduates in 1900 accelerated and partially redirected the changes being planned by Althoff and Studt. In contrast, Bismarck's role in the school question was an almost entirely negative one. The Chancellor's exaggerated fears of the possibilities for social disruption stemming from an academic proletariat of at most a few thousand unem-

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

ployed graduates served to reinforce Gossler's unwillingness to open the universities to Realgymnasium graduates. Yet he never actively supported Gossler's plans to lure the "ballast" to the modern schools by increasing the privileges obtainable there. His insistence that the Gymnasium produced atheists and republicans also did not translate into support for the semiclassical or modern schools; it did aggravate Wilhelm's own inclinations toward having the schools teach a politicalmonarchical catechism. Bismarck did support the secondary teachers of Prussia, but mostly because of their role in pro­ ducing loyal replacements for the civil service. The importance of several matters relating to the military in the debate over secondary school reform underlines the allpervading influence of the army in Imperial Germany. During the 18 80s, the high percentage of unfit one-year volunteers was a major source of the fears concerning the effects of overburdening on German youth. The one-year-volunteer privilege itself contributed greatly to the problem of the "bal­ last" in the Gymnasien; the unwillingness to consider seriously the elimination of this privilege demonstrates, along with the reluctance to eliminate the Vorschulen, the limits to reform within the society of the Second Reich. In 1890, Verdy's re­ form of the cadet academies helped push Gossler into calling the school conference; the army's call for an examination for the one-year privilege forced this interruption of the normal nine-year course on the schools. In 1900, the Kaiser's unhappiness with the knowledge demonstrated by prospective naval officers helped revive his interest in school reform; his desire to grant privileges to the graduates of cadet academies in order to attract more pupils to these schools accelerated the general progress toward equal privileges. Yet the army's advocacy of expanded privileges for Realgymnasium graduates failed to sway the Kaiser or the delegates in 1890; its representatives did not succeed in having either conference adopt a universal common foundation. The Prussian legislature and the political parties played a passive role in debate of the school question, acting usually

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

only in response to petitions and budget requests. Whereas the Bryce Commission and the Ribot Commission were launched by the British and French legislatures, the Ministry of Edu­ cation summoned the Prussian school conferences. Individual deputies did make probing interpellations and strong state­ ments in favor of reform, but in no sense did the legislature ever take the initiative in reforming secondary education. Mayors and town councils played a more influential part in the fight for secondary school reform than the minimal attention given to them in most studies of Imperial German politics would lead one to expect. Both in the early petitions for equal privileges for the first-class Realschule and in the protests after the school conference of 1890 voted to abolish the Realgymnasium, they made their voices heard with par­ ticular force. Max von Forckenbeck defended the Realgym­ nasium with eloquence and logic in 1891; Franz Adickes was the moving spirit behind the creation of the first Gymnasium with a modern common foundation, as well as the organizer of one of the first petitions, from civil servants and lawyers that favored opening the legal faculties to Realgymnasium graduates. Yet after weighing the influence of professional associa­ tions, industrialists, the army, the political parties, the towns, Bismarck, and the Kaiser, one cannot resist the conclusion that most of the major decisions affecting secondary education taken by the Prussian Ministry of Education between 1870 and 1902 stemmed from the needs and interests of the school system itself. The first opening of the philosophical faculties to graduates of first-class Realschulen came not because of petitions, but because of a shortage of teachers. The changes in the Gymnasium curriculum introduced in 1882 resulted from the complaints about poorly prepared students by many professors of science and medicine. Falk may have solicited the opinion of the German Physicians' Association as support for his decision not to open the medical faculties to graduates of the semiclassical schools, but the decision had already been made on the basis of reports from professors on the perform-

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

ance of such graduates as students of science and modern languages. The creation of the Oberrealschule came largely as a result of the inadequacy of the intermediate technical schools as a preparation for the technical institutes. The sur­ plus of teachers received more attention than any other profes­ sion in the discussion of the academic proletariat in the late 1880s; as Minister of Education, Gossler was certainly most acutely aware of the unemployed graduates looking for teach­ ing positions and viewed their plight as a major reason for not granting more privileges at the universities to Realgymnasium graduates. The demands placed on the Gymnasium by dropouts who entered commerce and industry and by grad­ uates who studied science and medicine eventually forced con­ servatives to choose between saving the classical curriculum or maintaining the Gymnasium's monopoly over preparation for most areas of the university; the choice for the curriculum in 1900, made at the expense of the expressed interests of many civil servants and professionals, resulted primarily from the influence of the Provincial School Authorities and men such as Wilamowitz and Harnack, who wanted to retain suf­ ficient time for Latin and Greek to allow at least some students to continue the heritage of the nineteenth-century humanist Gymnasium. Wilamowitz had also spoken in 1900 about allowing the Gymnasium to become again "the school of the ruling classes" by granting equal privileges to the other tracks. Was either the intent or the result of the reforms of 1900 to increase the social exclusiveness of the classical schools, to heighten the segmentation in the Prussian secondary school system? Such a contention depends on an interpretation of the expansion of the semiclassical and modern schools after 1900 as resulting from a successful driving of pupils out of the Gymnasium. A more satisfactory interpretation of this growth, however, is to view it as a flight by many parents and their sons from an unwanted classical curriculum that the Gymnasium's near mo­ nopoly over university and career privileges had forced them to endure. Such a flight had been evident during the period

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

of expanding secondary enrollments in the 1860s and 1870s, when many people had expected the semiclassical track would soon win the privileges that in fact did not come until after the turn of the century; but it had been interrupted in Gossler's time when these hopes proved illusory. Between 1880 and 1900, the inclusiveness of the Prussian secondary schools had risen only from 2.6 to 2.7 percent; in the next eleven years it rose rapidly to 3.2 percent, as more parents found investment in a secondary education, especially one in tune with the times, to be worthwhile.'4 The traditional Gebildeten continued to supply a greater percentage of pupils in the Gymnasien than in the Realgymnasien and Oberrealschulen, but to see this as making the classical school the home of the ruling class is perhaps to fall victim to the "mandarin ideology" of the Gebildeten. Their percentage of Gymnasium enrollments did not increase after 1900, and may have declined slightly: the Gebildeten supplied 21 percent of Gymnasium graduates between 1875 an^ 1899, and just 17 percent of all Gymnasium pupils in 1921." In the universities, students with academically trained fathers com­ prised 23 percent of the enrollment in 1890 and 1900, only 20 percent in 1911, despite the fact that the women students entering the universities in these years came primarily from educated backgrounds. The major beneficiaries of the expan­ sion of university enrollments after 1896 were not the children of men active in commerce and industry, whose percentage of the student body grew only from 38 percent in 1889 to 40 percent in both 1900 and 1911, but the offspring of lower officials and lower teachers, whose proportion of university enrollments increased from 21 to 27 percent in the first eleven years of the century.'6 >« Ringer, Education and Society, p. 272. » Ibid., p. 21; Titze, Politisierung der Erziehung, p. zoi. In contrast, the Gebildeten supplied 7 percent of Realgymnasium graduates between 1875 and 1899, and still only 8 percent of pupils in 1921. '* Ringer, Education and Society, pp. 92, 98; Jarausch, "Frequenz und Struktur," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik in Preussen, p. 124. Jarausch

COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Whatever social exclusiveness was retained for the Gym­ nasium, it was purchased at the cost of the exclusiveness of the universities and the professions. If sons of Gebildeten chose the legal and medical faculties more often than did Abtturienten from other social backgrounds, this was a segmenta­ tion of choice, not regulation. Realgymnasium and Oberrealschule graduates in the civil service may have faced indirect barriers to promotion, such as the lack of the necessary social connections, but nothing conclusive is known about this.37 In the 1860s, Matthew Arnold had congratulated the Prus­ sian people on having secondary schools that were "intelli­ gently planned to meet their intelligent wants."'8 The same can legitimately be said of Prussian, and German, secondary education after the reforms at the beginning of the twentieth century. Educating a significantly larger portion of the pop­ ulation than the French or Russian secondary schools; sending more students on to the universities and possessing a much more solid tradition of modern schools that did England; even moving decisively, if belatedly, to open higher education to women—the Prussian schools had, after much debate and several false starts, adapted successfully to many of the "de­ mands of the present." The greatest failure was in the inability to meet the vague yearnings of German youth. From the per­ spective of the late twentieth century, the German secondary schools on the eve of World War I may appear elitist in their social composition, old-fashioned in their continuing loyalty to Greek and Latin for many of their pupils, and authoritarian in their political teachings; but when compared to what they had been in 1870 or what other European countries possessed in 1914, they appear to have been well in step with the times. has also noted how the expansion of university enrollments resulted in a larger percentage of Catholic students: "Social Transformation of the Uni­ versity," p. 619. >7 Jarausch, "Frequenz und Struktur," in Baumgart, ed., Bildungspolitik in Preussen, p. 131. '* Arnold, Higher Schools, p. 44.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following bibliography divides the various sources used for this study into coherent groups rather than just listing all primary and secondary sources in two lists. The first four types of primary sources— archives, official publications, newspapers, and periodicals—are selfexplanatory. The reports of foreign observers of German education and the recollections of school life used primarily for chapter 2 are next, followed by the memoirs, letters, and so forth, that provide information about the political process of school reform and the school conferences. For both the general literature from the debate of the school question and the secondary sources, works about Ger­ many are listed separately from the selected materials on other coun­ tries that were consulted. Only a few works defy such classification. Ludwig Gurlitt's Der Deutsche und seine Schule, which combines reminiscences of school life, information on the conferences, and pleas for reform, is listed under the second area; Gustav Holzmiiller's Der Kampf urn die Schulreform is included among the general primary literature, al­ though it is also a history of the debate up until 1890. The first two editions of Friedrich Paulsen's Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts are treated as primary sources, the third edition that includes an extension by Rudolf Lehmann is listed as a secondary work. Jules Simon's La reforme de I'enseignement secondaire is a primary source on French schooling, but because of its heavy reliance on comparison with Germany, it is included among the foreign observers of German schools. I. ARCHIVAL MATERIALS

Zentrales Staatsarchiv, Historische Abteilung II, Merseburg KULTUSMINISTERIUM

Rep. 76 Va, Sekt. 1, Gen. Tit. VIII, No. 12, Vols. I-V: Die Immatriculation der Abiturienten der Realschulen bei der Koniglichen Landes-Universitaten Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. aa, No. 13, Vols. II—IV: Berechtigungen der Realschulen Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. b, No. 11, Vol. I-IV: Falle des Selbstmordes

BIBLIOGRAPHY bezw. Selbstmordversuches von Lehrern und Schüler höheren Unterrichtsanstalten Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. i , Gen. z, No. 2.0, Vols. VID—E: Zeitungsartikel und Denkschriften fiber die Reform des höheren Schulwesens Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 20, adhib. VIII: Allgemeine Lehrpläne, Abänderung der Ordnung der Reifeprüfung, 1891 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen, z. No. 114: Reform des hoheren Schulwesens 1888-1889 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 114, adhib. A: Massenpetition Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 114, adhib. B: Denkschrift fiber die seit dem Jahre 1882 gemachten Vorschlage zur Reform der hoheren Schulen Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115, Vols. I-IV: Schulreform Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115, adhib. a: Allerhochste Erlasse v. 1.V.i 8 89 fiber die Reform des Schulwesens Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115, adhib. b, Vols. I—II: Die Enquete Kommission (Material) Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115, adhib. c, Vols. I-V: Zeitungsartikel und Denkschriften fiber die Reform des hoheren Schulwesens Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115E: Protokoll des Ausschusses, 1891—1900 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115F: Bericht an der Kaiser, 18891903 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 1 1 5 G , Vols. I—II; Gutachten fiber die Vereinfachung des Lehrstoffs Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115H, Vols. I—III: Die eingereichten Schriften zur Reform des hoheren Unterrichtswesens, 1891-1900 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 115K, Vols. I-VIII: Fragen und Gutachten zur Schulkonferenz 1900 Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 127 Verein ftir Schulreform Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 129, Vols. I-VII Die den hoheren Schulen zustehenden Berechtigungen Rep. 76 VI, Sekt. 1, Gen. z, No. 149, Vols. I—II: Reformschulen GEHEIMES ZIVILKABINETT

2.2.1, No. 22307 Hohere Lehranstalten, allgemeines (316)

BIBLIOGRAPHY STAATSMINISTERIUM

Rep. 90a, Abt. B, Tit. Ill zb, No. 6, Vols. 105, 106, 140 Sitzungsprotokolle Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Dahletn Rep. 92, Bosse, Vols. VII-IX Bodelschwingh Archiv,

Bethel-bei-Bielefeld

BODELSCHWINGH PAPERS

No. 81: Schulreform 1883—1909: Briefe B XI, 2, 2: Schulfragen, Hohere Schulen, Bodelschwingh's Mitarbeit

II. OFFICIAL AND OFFICIALLY SPONSORED PUBLICATIONS

Akademische Gutachten iiber die Zulassung von Realschul-Abiturienten zu Facultats-Studien. Berlin, 1870. Centralblatt fiir die gesamte Unterrichtsverwaltung in Preussen [18701902] Deutscher Reichs- und Koniglich Preussischer Staats-Anzeiger "Gutachten der Kgl. Wissenschaftliche Deputation fiir das Medizinalwesen betr. die Ueberbiirdung der Schiiler in den hdheren Lehranstalten." Vierteljahrsschrift fiir gerichtliche Medizin und offentliches Sanitatswesen, n.s. 11 (i884):35i-378. Lexis, Wilhelm. "Denkschrift fiber die den Bedarf Preussens entsprechende Normalzah) der Studirenden der verschiedenen Fakultaten." 2d ed. Published as a manuscript. [Berlin, 1891] , ed. Die Reform des hdheren Schulwesens in Preussen. Halle, 1902. , ed. Das Unterrichtswesen im Deutschen Reich. 4 vols. Berlin, 1904. Rethwisch, Conrad. Deutschlands hdheres Schulwesen im neunzehnten Jahrhunderte. Berlin, 1893. "Selbstmorde von Schfiler in Preussen, 1883-1888." Zeitschrift des Koniglichen Preussischen StatisUschen Bureaus 30 (i89o):xxxiii. Stenographische Berichte iiber die Verhandlungen des Preussischen Hauses der Abgeordneten Verhandlungen iiber Fragen des hoheren Unterrichts, Berlin 4. bis 17. Dezember 1890. Berlin, 1891.

(317)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Verhandlungen iiber Fragen des hoheren Unterrichts, Berlin 6. bis 8. Juni 1900. Halle, 1900. Wiese, Ludwig, ed. Verordnungen und Gesetze fiir die hdheren Schulen in Preussen. 2d ed. Berlin, 1875. III. NEWSPAPERS

National-Zeitung Neue Preussische Zeitung Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung Vossische Zeitung See also the clipping files of the Ministry of Education listed with the archival materials. I V . PERIODICALS, NEWSLETTERS, AND PROCEEDINGS

Blatter fiir hoheres Schulwesen Central-Organ fiir die Interesse des Realschulwesens Deutsche Revue Deutsche Rundschau Educational Review Die Gartenlaube Die Grenzboten Das humanistische Gymnasium Jahresberichte iiber das hdhere Schulwesen Mitteilungen des Allgemeinen Deutschen Realschulmannervereins Mitteilungen des Vereins fiir Schulreform Monatsblatt des Liberalen Schulvereins Rheinlands und Westfalens Die neue deutsche Schule Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Padagogik Padagogische Studien Preussischer Jahrbiicher Schriften des Deutschen Einheitsschulvereins Schriften des Vereins fiir Sozialpolitik Stahl und Eisen Teachers College Record Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft deutscher Naturforscher und Aerzte Verhandlungen der Versammlungen deutscher Philologen und Schulmanner Zeitschrift des Vereins deutscher Ingenieure

(318)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Zeitschrift Zeitschrift Zeitsehrift Zeitsehrift Zeitsehrift rieht Zeitsehrift

fur das Gymnasialwesen fiir den physikalisehen und chemisehen Unterricht fiir die Reform der hoheren Schulen fiir lateinlose hohere Sehulen fiir mathematisehen und naturwissensehaftliehen Unterfiir Sehulgesundheitspflege V. FOREIGN OBSERVERS OF GERMAN SCHOOLS

Arnold, Matthew. Higher Schools and Universities in Germany, zd ed. London, 1874. Bibby, Cyril, ed. Τ. H. Huxley on Education. Cambridge, 1971. Bird, Charles B. A. Higher Education in Germany and England. London, 1884. Bolton, Frederic. The Secondary School System of Germany. New York, 1900. Breal, Michel. Excursions pedagogiques. Paris, i88z. Burgess, John W. Reminiscences of an American Scholar. New York, 1934·

Cater, Harold Dean. "Henry Adams Reports on a German Gym­ nasium." American Historical Review 53 (1947):59-74. Collier, Price. Germany and the Germans from an American Point of View. New York, 1914. Curtis, Μ. M. "The Condition of German Universities." Educational Review 2 (1891):28-39. Dawson, W. H. Germany and the Germans, ζ vols. New York, 1894. Hammond, H.E.D. "The Higher Schools of Baden." Great Britain Board of Education. Special Reports on Educational Subjects, vol. 3. London, 1898. Hughes, R. E. The Making of Citizens: A Study in Comparative Education. London and New York, 1902. Hungerford, Edward. "The Real School Contest in Germany." The NewEnglander 11 (September 1882):639-664. Lukens, Hermann T. "The School Fatigue Question in Germany." Educational Review 15 (1898):246-254. Lyster, Mary A. "Higher Schools for Girls in Germany." Great Brit­ ain Board of Education. Special Reports on Educational Sub­ jects, vol. 9. London, 1902.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Magnus, Sir Philip. Education in Bavaria. Monographs of the In­ dustrial Education Association, vol. i, no. z. New York, 1888. Payne, Joseph. The Science and Art of Education. London, 1874. Pinloche, A. L'enseignement secondaire en Allemagne. Paris, 1900. Prettyman, C. William. "The Higher Girls' Schools of Prussia." Teachers College Record 12 (1911):1-59. Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1889—1890. Washington, 1893. Russell, James E. German Higher Schools, zd ed. New York, 1905. Sadler, Michael. "Problems in Prussian Secondary Education for Boys." Great Britain Board of Education. Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 3. London, 1898. . "The Unrest in Secondary Education in Germany and Else­ where." Great Britain Board of Education. Special Reports on Educational Subjects, Vol. 9. London, 1902. Salmon, Lucy Maynard. "History in the German Gymnasia." Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1897. Washington, 1898. Simon, Jules. La reforme de l'enseignement secondaire. Paris, 1874. Thurber, C. H. "Higher Schools of Prussia and the School Conference of 1890." Report of the Commissioner of Education for the Year 1889—1890. Washington, 1893. . The Principles of School Organization. Worcester, Mass., 1899. Whitman, Sidney. Imperial Germany. Meadville, Pa., 1897.

VI. WORKS CONTAINING RECOLLECTIONS OF SCHOOL LIFE Collections Graf, Alfred, ed. Schiilerjahre: Erlebnisse und Urteile namhafter Zeitgenossen. Berlin, 19x2. Grote, L. R., ed. Die Medizin der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellungen. 8 vols. Leipzig, 1923—1929. Hahn, Erich, ed. Die Padagogik der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellung­ en. ζ vols. Leipzig, 1926-1927. Planitz, Hans, ed. Die Rechtswissenschaft der Gegenwart in Selbst­ darstellungen. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1924—1929. Schmidt, Raymund, ed. Die Philosophie der Gegenwart in Selbst­ darstellungen. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1923—1924.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Individuals Binding, Rudolf. Erlebtes Leben. Potsdam, 1927. Bliiher, Hans. Werke und Tage. Vol. 1. Jena, 1920. Bonatz, Paul. Leben und Bauen. Stuttgart, 1950. Bonn, Moritz Julius. Wandering Scholar. N e w York, 1948. Brecht, Arnold. Aus nachster Nahe. Stuttgart, 1966. Bruncken, Ernest. " T h e German Gymnasium as Seen from a Pupil's Standpoint." Educational Review 21 (1901): 1 6 3 - 1 7 3 . Corinth, Lovis. Selbstbiographie. Leipzig, 1926. Curtius, Ludwig. Deutsche und antike Welt. Stuttgart, 1952. Dibelius, Otto. Ein Christ ist immer im Dienst: Erlebnisse und Erfahrungen in einer Zeitenwende. Stuttgart, 1963. Driesch, Hans. Lebenserinnerungen. Basel, 1 9 5 1 . Ernst, Paul. Jugenderinnerungen. Giitersloh, 1959. 1869-1953. Foerster, Friedrich Wilhelm. Erlebte Weltgeschichte, Nuremberg, 1953. Frenssen, Gustav. Lebensbericht. Berlin, 1 9 4 1 . Friedensburg, Ferdinand. Lebenserinnerungen. Frankfurt-am-Main and Bonn, 1969. Gerlach, Helmut von. Von Rechts nach Links. Edited by Emil Ludwig. Zurich, 1937. Gerstenhauer, M a x Robert. Der volkische Gedanke in Vergangenheit und Zukunft. Leipzig, 1933. Glasenapp, Helmuth von. Meine Lebensreise. Wiesbaden, 1964. Glum, Friedrich. Zwischen Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft und Politik. Bonn, 1964. Groener, Wilhelm. Lebenserinnerungen. Edited by Friedrich Hiller von Gaertringen. Gottingen, 1957. Halbe, M a x . Scholle und Schicksal. Munich, 1933. Haller, Johannes. Lebenserinnerungen. Stuttgart, i960. Hart, Heinrich. Gesammelte Werke. 3 vols. Berlin, 1907. Hauptmann, Gerhart. Das Abenteuer meiner Jugend. 2 vols. Berlin,

1937-

Hellpach, Willy. Wirken in Wirren: Lebenserinnerungen. 2 vols. Hamburg, 1948. Hillard, Gustav [Gustav Steinbomer], Herren und Narren der Welt. Munich, 1954. Hindenburg, Herbert von. Am Rande zweier Jahrhunderte. Berlin, 1938. Hoche, Alfred. Jahresringe. Berlin, 1 9 4 1 . (321)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Homeyer, Fritz. Ein Leben fur das Buck. Aschaffenburg, 1961. Huch, Rudolf. Mein Weg: Lebenserinnerungen. Zeulenrode, 1937. Ihering, Herbert. Begegnungen mit Zeit und Menschen. Bremen, 1965. Kessler, Harry Graf. Gesichter und Zeiten. Berlin, 1935. Kiihnemann, Eugen. Mit unbefangener Stirn: Mein Lebensbesuch. Heilbronn, 1937. Kutscher, Artur. Der Theaterprofessor. Munich, i960. Lessing, Theodor. Einmal und nie wieder. Giitersloh, 1969. Leyen, Friedrich von der. Leben und Freiheit der Hochschule. Co­ logne, i960. Lienhard, Friedrich. Jugendjahre. Werke, 1st ser., vol. 4. Stuttgart, 1924. Litzmann, Berthold. Im alten Deutschland. Berlin, 19Z3. Lubarsch, Otto. Ein bewegtes Gelehrtenleben. Berlin, 1931. Ludwig, Emil. Gifts of Life: A Retrospect. Translated by Μ. I. Rob­ ertson. Boston, 1931. Luther, Hans. Politiker ohne Partei: Erinnerungen. Stuttgart, i960. Mann, Thomas. Briefe3 1889-1936. Edited by Erika Mann. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1961. . "Lebensabriss." Gesammelte Werke. Vol. 11. No Place, i960. Mayer, Gustav. Erinnerungen. Zurich and Vienna, 1949. Meinecke, Friedrich. Autobiographische Schriften. Edited by Eberhard Kessel. Werke, vol. 6. Stuttgart, 1969. Michaelis, Georg. Fur Staat und Volk: Eine Lebensgeschichte. Berlin, 1922. Miiller, Karl Alexander von. Aus Garten der Vergangenheit. Stutt­ gart, 1952. Niekisch, Ernst. Gewagtes Leben. Cologne and Berlin, 1958. Oppenheimer, Franz. Erlebtes, Erstrebtes, Erreichtes: Lebenserinnerungen. Diisseldorf, 1964. Pastor, Ludwig Freiherr von. Tagebiicher—Briefe—Erinnerungen. Edited by Wilhelm Wiihr. Heidelberg, 1950. Paulsen, Rudolf. Mein Leben. Berlin, 1936. Radbruch, Gustav. Der innere Weg. Stuttgart, 1951. Rothacker, Erich. Heitere Erinnerungen. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1963. Schacht, Hjalmar. My First 76 Years. Translated by Diane Pyke. London, 1955. Schleich, Carl Ludwig. Besonnte Vergangenheit: Lebenserinnerungen. Berlin, 1925.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Schoenberner, Franz. Confessions of a European Intellectual. New York, 1946. Schweitzer, Albert. Aus meiner Kindheit und Jugendzeit. Munich, 1949. Sinsheimer, Hermann. Gelebt in Paradies. Munich, 1953. Stegemann, Hermann. Erinnerungen aus meinem Leben und aus meiner Zeit. Berlin and Leipzig, 1930. Stutterheim, Kurt von. Zwischen den Zeiten: Erinnerungen. Berlin, 1938. Thoma, Ludwig. "Erinnerungen." Gesammelte Werke, vol. 1. Mu­ nich, 1956. Uhde-Bernays, Hermann. Im Lichte der Freiheit: Erinnerungen aus den Jahren 1880 bis 1914. Wiesbaden, 1947. Vogeler, Johann Heinrich. Erinnerungen. Edited by Erich Weinert. Berlin, 1952. Winterstein, Eduard von. Mein Leben und meine Zeit. Berlin, 1942. Zuckmayer, Carl. A Part of Myself. Translated by Richard and Clara Winston. New York, 1970. VII. MEMOIRS, DIARIES, LETTERS, AND SPEECHES

Ayme, Fra^ois. Guillaume II: une education imperiale. Paris, 1897. Bigelow, Poultney. The German Emperor and His Eastern Neigh­ bors. New York, 1892. . Prussian Memories, 1864-1914. New York and London, 1915. Bismarck, Otto von. Die gesammelte Werke. Edited by Hermann von Petersdorff et al. 15 vols. Berlin, 1923-1933. Bodelschwingh, Friedrich von. Briefwechsel. Part 5,1890 bis 1891. Edited by Alfred Adam. Bethel bei Bielefeld, 1968. Bosse, Robert. Bosse-Buchlein: Ausspriiche und Ausfiihrungen des Kultusministers iiber und fiir Schule und Lehrerstand. Halle, 1896. . "Erinnerungen." Die Grenzboten 63 (1904):159-168. Biilow, Bernhard von. Memoirs. 4 vols. Vol. 1, From Secretary of State to Imperial Chancellor, 1897-1903. Translated by F. A. Voigt. Boston, 1931. Bunsen, Marie von. The World I Used to Know. Edited and trans­ lated by Oakley Williams. London, 1930.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bussmann, Walter, ed. Staatssekretar Graf Herbert von Bismarck: Aus seiner politischen Privatkorrespondenz. Gottingen, 1964. Butler, Nicholas Murray. Across the Busy Years, 2 vols. New York and London, 1939-1940. Chamberlain, Houston Stewart. Briefe. 2 vols. Munich, 1928. Eickhoff, Richard. Politische Profile: Erinnerungeti aus vier Jahrzehnten. Dresden, 1929. Faber, W. Gedachtntsrede am Sarge des verewigten Herrn Dr. Konrad Schottmiiller. Berlin, 1894. Fontane, Theodor. Briefe an Georg Friedlander. Edited by Kurt Schreinert. Heidelberg, 1954. Fulford, Roger, ed. Darling Child: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and the Croum Princess of Prussia, 1871—1878. Lon­ don, 1976. Gossler, Gustav von. Ansprachen und Reden. Berlin, 1890. Gurlitt, Ludwig. Der Deutsche und seine Schule: Erinnerungen, Beobachtungen und Wiinsche eines Lehrers. Berlin, 1905. Hendrichs, W. von. Prinz Wilhelm von Preussen: Ein Furstenbtld detn Deutschen Volke gewidmet. Berlin, 1888. Heyderhoff, Julius, ed. Im Ring der Gegner Bismarcks: Denkschriften uttd politischer Briefwechsel Franz von Roggenbacbs. Leipzig, 1943· , and Wentzcke, Paul, ed. DeutscherLiberalismus im Zeitalter Bismarcks. 2 vols. Berlin, 1926. Hinzpeter, Georg. Kaiser Wtlhelm II: Eine Skizze nach der Natur gezeichnet. Bielefeld, 1888. Hohenlohe-Schillingsfiirst, Chlodwig zu. Denkwiirdigkeiten. Edited by Friedrich Curtius. 2 vols. Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1907. . Denkwiirdigkeiten der Reichskanzlerzeit. Edited by K. A. von Miiller. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1931. Keller, Mathilde von. 40 JahreimDienstderKaiserin. Leipzig, 1935. Klaussmann, A. Oskar, ed. Kaiserreden: Reden und Erlasse, Briefe und Telegramme Kaiser Wilhelms der Zweiten. Leipzig, 1902. Lange, Friedrich. Reines Deutschtum: Grundzuge einer nationalen Weltanschauung. 4th ed. enl. Berlin, 1904. Lange, Helene. Lebenserinnerungen. Berlin, 1930. Lucius von Ballhausen, Robert S.M.J., Baron. Bismarck-Erinnerungen. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1921. Matthias, Adolf. Erlebtes und Zukunftsfragen aus Schulverwaltung, Unterricht und Erziehung. Berlin, 1913. (32-4)

BIBLIOGRAPHY . Im Zeichen der Schulreform. Berlin, 1913. Moltke, Hellmuth von. Gesammelte Schriften und Denkwiirdigkeiten. 8 vols. Vol. 5, Briefe und Erinnerungen an ihm. Berlin, 1892. Nowak, K. F., and Thimme, Friedrich, ed. Erinnerungen und Gedanken des Botschafters Anton Graf Monts. Berlin, 1932. Ostwald, Wilhelm. Lebenslinien: Eine Selbstbiographie. 3 vols. Berlin, 1927. Paulsen, Friedrich. An Autobiography. Translated and edited by Theodor Lorenz. New York, 1938. . Ferdinand Tonneis—Friedrich Paulsen: Briefwechsel 18761908. Edited by Olaf Klose, Eduard Georg Jacoby, and Irma Fischer. Kiel, 1961. Ponsonby, Frederick, ed. Letters of the Empress Frederick. London, 1929. Radziwill, Marie. Lettres de la Princesse Radziwill au General de Robilant, 1889-1914. 4 vols. Vol. 1, 1889-1895. Bologna and Paris, 1933. Raschdau, Ludwig. Unter Bismarck und Caprivi. Berlin, 1939. Rich, Norman, and Fischer, M. H. Die geheimen Papiere Friedrich von Holsteins. German edition by Werner Frauendienst. 4 vols. Gottingen, 1957. Rohl, John C. G., ed. Philipp Eulenburgs Politische Korrespondenz. 3 vols. Boppard am Rhein, 1976—1981. Schlozer, Kurd von. Letzte romische Briefe, 1882—1894. Edited by Leopold von Schlozer. Stuttgart, 1924. Schmidt-Ott, Friedrich. Erlebtes und Erstrebtes. Wiesbaden, 1952. Schneider, Karl. Ein halbes Jahrhundert im Dienste von Kirche und Schule. id ed. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1901. Schneidewin, Max. "Briefe des Reichskanzlers von Caprivi." Deutsche Revue 47 no. 2 ( i 9 2 2 ) : i 3 6 - i 4 7 , 247-258. Schrader, Wilhelm. Erfahrungen und Bekenntnisse. Berlin, 1900. Schulenburg, Sigrid von der, ed. Briefwechsel zwischen Wilhelm Dilthey und dem Grafen Paul Yorck von Wartenburg, 1877-1897. Halle, 1923. Seyffardt, Ludwig Friedrich. Erinnerungen. Leipzig, 1900. Treitschke, Heinrich von. Briefe. 3 vols. Vol. 3,1866—1896. Edited by Max Cornicelius. Leipzig, 1920. Waldersee, Alfred Count von. Aus dem Briefwechsel des Generalfeldmarschalls Alfred Grafen von Waldersee. Vol. 1, Die Ber-

(315)

BIBLIOGRAPHY liner jahre, 1886—1891. Edited by Heinrich Otto Meisner. Berlin and Leipzig, 1928. . Denkwiirdigkeiten. Edited by Heinrich Otto Meisner. 3 vols. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1923. Wemyss, Rosslyn. Memoirs and Letters of the Right Honorable Sir Robert Morier. 2 vols. London, 1911. Wendt, Gustav. Lebenserinnerungen eines Schulmanns. Berlin, 1909. Whitman, Sidney. German Memories. London, 1912. Wiese, Ludwig. Lebenserinnerungen und Amtserfahrungen. 2 vols. Berlin, 1896. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. My Recollections, 1848-1914. Translated by G. C. Richards. London, 1930. Wilhelm II. Aus meinem Leben, 1859-1888. Berlin and Leipzig, 1927. . Ereignisse und Gestalten aus dem Jahren 1878—1918. Leipzig and Berlin, 1922. Zedlitz-Trutzschler, Robert Count von. Twelve Years at the Imperial German Court. Translated by Alfred Kalisch. New York, 1924. V I I I . BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, AND M A J O R ARTICLES ON SECONDARY SCHOOL REFORM

Alethagoras. Gymnasiale Bildung und sittliche Erziehung der Jugend. Braunschweig, 1894. . Unser Gymnasialunterricht. Braunschweig, 1889. Alldeutscher Verband. Zwanzig Jahre Alldeutscher Arbeit und Kampfe. Leipzig, 1910. Baer. A. Der Selbstmord im kindlichen Lebensalter. Leipzig, 1901. Bahlsen, Leo. "New Methods of Teaching Modern Languages." Teachers College Record 4 (i903):i6i—251. Baumann, Gustav. Die klassische Bildung der deutschen Jugend vom padagogischen und vom deutsch-nationalen Standpunkt aus betrachtet. Berlin, 1900. Baumeister, R. Die technischen Hochschulen. Berlin, 1886. Bebel, August. Die Frau in der Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft. Hottingen-Zurich, 1883. Bernheim, Ernst. Die Universitatsunterricht und die Erfordemisse der Gegenwart. Berlin, 1898. Billroth, Theodor. The Medical Sciences in the German Universities: A Study in the History of Civilization. New York, 1924. (326)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bonitz, Hermann. "Die gegenwartigen Reformfragen in unseren hoheren Schulwesen." Preussische Jahrbiicher 35 (i875):i43—164. Brand, Eugen. Zur Reform der humanistischen Gymnasieti in Bayem: Vorschlage seit 1891, Kritik und Anregungen. Bamberg, 1913. Breymann, Hermann. Die neusprachliche Reformliteratur. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1895-1900. Biicher, Karl. Die gewerbliche Bildungsfrage und der industrielle Rtickgang. Eisenach, 1877. Biirgerstein, Leo. "Die Arbeitskurve einer Schulstunde." Zeitschrift fur Schulgesundheitspflege 4 (1891):543-563. Cauer, Paul. Aus Berufund Leben: Heimgebrachtes. Berlin, 1912. . Siebzehn Jahre im Kampfum die Schulreform: Gesammelte Aufsatze. Berlin, 1906. . Staat und Erziehung: Schulpolitische Bedenken. Kiel and Leipzig, 1890. Cohn, Hermann. Untersuchungen der Augen von 10,060 Schulkindem, nebst Vorschlage zur Verbesserungen der den Augen nachteiligen Schuleinrichtungen. Leipzig, 1867. Conrad, Johannes. The German Universities for the Last Fifty Years. Translated by John Hutchinson. Glasgow, 1885. Conradi, Hermann. Wilhelm II und die junge Generation: Eine zeitpsychologische Betrachtung. Leipzig, 1890. Conradt, Carl. Dilettantentum, Lehrerschaft und Verwaltung in unserem hdheren Schulwesen. Wiesbaden, 1890. Cremer, August. Ueber die ausserhalb der Schule liegenden Ursachen der Nervositat. Sammlung von Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiete der padagogische Psychologie und Physiologie, vol. 2. Berlin, 1899. Danker, Otto. Die Gymnasien bezw. Realschulen I. O. und das Studium der neueren Sprachen. Kassel, 1883. Dillmann, Christian. Das Realgymnasium. Stuttgart, 1884. Dittrich, Eugen. Grundziige einer historischen Kritik des hdheren Schulwesens und einer Reorganisation desselben. Leipzig, 1903. DuBois-Reymond, Emil. Reden. 2 vols. 2d ed. Leipzig, 1912. Ebbinghaus, Hermann. "Ueber eine neue Methode zur Priifung geistiger Fahigkeiten." Zt. fur Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 13 (i897):40i—457. "Die Einwirkung der Organisation unserer hoheren und mittleren

(32.7)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schulen auf das soziale Leben und die Erwerbstatigkeit der Na­ tion." Schriften des Vereins fur Sozialpolitik 28 (1884):1-150. Eitner, Ernst Gustav. Die Jugendspiel. Leipzig, 1891. Eucken, Rudolf. Der Kampf um das Gymnasium. Stuttgart, 1891. Eulenburg, Albert. "Schiilerselbstmorde." Zt. fur padagogische Psychologie 9 (1907):1-31. Falch, E. Gedanken iiber eine Reform unseres Mittelschulwesens. Wiirzburg, 1888. Fick, Adolf. Gesammelte Schriften. 4 vols. Vol. 4, Vermischte Schriften. Wiirzburg, 1906. Fischer, Albert. Das alte Gymnasium und die neue Zeit. Gross-Lichterfelde, 1900. Fischer, Heinrich. Die Reform der hoheren Schulen: Ein Versuch der Verstandigung. Greifswald, 1876. Flach, J. Die Einheitsschule der Zukunft: Ein Mahnwort fiir Alle. Leipzig, 1887. Forster, Bemhard. Zur Frage der nationalen Erziehung. Leipzig, 1883. Frick, Otto. Padagogische und didaktische Abhandlungen. Edited by Georg Frick. 2 vols. Halle an der Saale, 1893. Friedrich, Gustav. Die hoheren Schulen und die Gegenwart. Leipzig, 1896. Gallenkamp, W. Die Reform der hoheren Lehranstalten insbesondere der Realschulen. Berlin, 1874. Gemoll, A. Das Gymnasium und seine Stellung zu der Petition der akademischen Vereinigung fiir deutsche Schulreform. Breslau, 1888. Goering, Hugo. Die neue deutsche Schule: Ein Weg zur Verwirklichung vaterldndischer Erziehung. Leipzig, 1890. Griesbach, Hermann. Gesundheit und Schule. Leipzig, 1902. . Hygienische Schulreform: Ein Wort an die Gebildeten aller Stande. Hamburg and Leipzig, 1899. Grimm, Hermann. "Die Deutsche Schulfrage und unsere Klassiker." Deutsche Rundschau 55 (1888):257-281. . Fragmente. Berlin and Stuttgart, 1900. Gunther, S. "Ueber den Bildungswert der mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Facher." Padagogisches Archiv 32 (1890):354372. Giissfeldt, Paul. Die Erziehung der deutschen Jugend. Berlin, 1890. Gurlitt, Ludwig. Schiilerselbstmorde. Berlin, 1908. Haeckel, Ernst. "Real-Gymnasien und Formal-Gymnasien." Zt. fiir

BIBLIOGRAPHY mathematischen

und naturwissenschaftlichen

Unterrichts 17

(1887):546-550. Hammerstein, Ludwig von. Das Preussische Schulmonopol mit besonderem Rücksicht auf die Gymnasien. Freiburg i. B., 1893. Hartmann, Eduard von. Zur Reform des hdheren Scbulwesens. Berlin, 1875. Hartwich, Emil. Woran wir leiden. Diisseldorf, 1882. Hasemann, P. Die Ueberbiirdung der Schuler der hdheren Lehranstalten Deutschlands mit Beziehung auf die Wehrhaftigkeit des deutschen Volkes. 2d ed. Strassburg, 1884. Hasse, Paul. "Schule und Nervosität: Zur Beleuchtung der Ueberburdungsfrage vom irrenarztlichen Standpunkte." Die Gartenlaube (1881):7~9. . Die Ueberbürdung unsererbürgend.Braunschweig, 1880. Hegar, Alfred. Spezialismus und allgemeine Bildung. Freiburg i. B. and Tubingen, 1882. Helmholtz, Hermann von. Vortrage und Reden. 2 vols. 4th ed. Braunschweig, 1896. Herzog, J. A. Die Schule und ihr neuer Aufbau auf naturlicher Grundlage. Zurich, 1892. Hildebrand, Rudolf. Vom deutschen Sprachunterricht in der Schule und von deutscher Erziehung und Bildung iiberhaupt. 13 th ed. Leipzig and Berlin, 1913. Hillebrand, Karl. "Halbbildung und Gymnasialreform." Deutsche Rundschau 18 (i879):422-45i. . " O n Half-Culture in Germany." Contemporary Review 38 (August i88o):i99-220. . "Sources of Discontent in Germany." Contemporary Review 38 (July 18 80) 141-54. Hirzel, Rudolf. Ueber die Stellung der classischen Philologie in der Gegenwart. Leipzig, 1888. Hofler, Alois. "Die humanistischen Aufgaben des physikalischen Unterrichts." Zt. fur den physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht 2 (i888):i—8. Hofmann, August Wilhelm. Die Frage der Teilung der philosophischen Facultat. 2d ed. Berlin, 1881. Holzmiiller, Gustav. Der Kampfum die Schulreform in seinen neuesten Phasen. Hagen, 1890. Horn. J. F. Das Zukunftsgymnasium. Gotha, 1893.

(319)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Hornemann, Ferdinand. "Die Zukunft unserer hdheren Schulen." Schriften des Deutschen Einheitsschulvereins z (I887):I—115. Jaeger, Oskar. Erlebtes und Erstrebtes: Reden und Aufsatze. Munich, 1907. . Das humanistische Gymnasium und die Petition um durchgreifende Schulreform. Wiesbaden, 1889. . Pro Domo: Reden und Aufsatze. Berlin, 1894. Kalckstein, Karl von. "Nationale und humanistische Erziehung!" Deutsche Schriften fur nationales Leben. Kiel, 1891. Kammel, Otto. DerKampfum das humanistische Gymnasium. Leipzig, 1901. Keferstein, Horst. Die Ueberfiillung der hdheren Berufsarten. Hamburg, 1889. Kekule, August. Die Principien des hdheren Unterrichts und die Reform der Gymnasien. Bonn, 1878. Killmann, M . Die Direktoren-Versammlungen des Konigreichs Preussen von i860 bis 1889. Berlin, 1890. Kirchhoff, Adolf. Rede bei Antritt des Rectorats der Koniglichen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat. Berlin, 1883. Kirchhoff, Arthur, ed. Die akademische Frau: Gutachten hervorragendener Universitiitsprofessoren, Frauenlehrer und Schriftsteller iiber die Befahigung der Frau zum wissenschaftlichen Studium und Berufe. Berlin, 1897. Klinghardt, Hermann. Das hdhere Schulwesen Schwedens und dessen Reform in modemen Sinne. Leipzig, 1887. Korting, Gustav. Neuphilologische Essays. Heilbronn, 1887. Kotelmann, Ludwig. 1st die Jugend der hdheren Lehranstalten mit Schularbeit uberbiirdet? Hamburg, 1881. . School Hygiene. Translated by John A . Berstrom and Edward Conradi. Syracuse, N . Y . , 1899. Kraepelin, Emil. Ueber geistige Arbeit, 2d ed. Jena, 1897. . Zur Ueberburdungsfrage. Jena, 1897. Kreyssig, Friedrich. Ueber Realismus und Realschulwesens. Berlin, 1871. Kropatscheck, Hermann. Die Erziehung der deutschen Jugend: Ein Beitrag zur Charakteristik modemer Schulreform. Brandenburg, 1890. Kruse, Karl. " D a s angeklagte Gymnasium." Zt. fiir das alwesen 42 (I888):273-282, 3 3 7 - 3 5 1 .

(330)

Gymnasi-

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Laas, Ernst. Der deutsche Unterricht auf hoheren Lehranstalten. Berlin, 1872. Lagarde, Paul de. Deutsche Schriften. Edited by Karl August Fischer. Berlin, 1940. . Paul Gussfeldt: Die Erziehung der deutschen Jugend. Berlin, 1890. Langbehn, Julius. Rembrandt als Erzieher. Weimar, 1943. Lange, Helene. Higher Education of Women in Europe. Translated by L. R. Klemm. New York, 1897. . Kampfzeiten: Aufsatze und Reden aus vier Jahrzehnten. 2 vols. Berlin, 1928. Lange, Konrad von. Die kiinstlerische Erziehung der deutschen Ju­ gend. Darmstadt, 1893. Launhardt, Wilhelm. Am sausenden Webstuhl der Zeit. Leipzig and Berlin, 1900. Lehmhaus, Fritz. Die Vorschule. Langensalza, 1894. Lichtwark, Alfred. Der Deutsche der Zukunft. Berlin, 1905. Lietz, Hermann. Schulreform durch Neugrundung: Ausgewahlte padagogische Schriften. Edited by Rudolf Lassahn. Paderborn, 1970. Liszt, Franz von. Die Reform des juristischen Studiums in Preussen. Berlin, 1886. Lorinser, C. S. Zum Schutz der Gesundheit in den Schulen. Berlin, 1861. Mach, Ernst. Popular-wissenschaftliche Vorlesungen. 3d ed. Leipzig, 1903. Manoff, Wassil A. Das Ueberburdungsproblem in den hoheren Schu­ len Deutschlands, mit besonderer Berucksichtigung des preussischen Gymnasiums. Jena, 1899. Masaryk, Thomas G. Der Selbstmord als sociale Massenerscheinung der modernen Civilisation. Vienna, 1881. Mascher, H. A. Das deutsche Schulwesen nach seiner historischen Entwicklung und den Forderungen der Gegenwart. Eisenach, 1876. Matthias, Adolf. Aus Schule, Unterricht und Erziehung: Gesammelte Aufsatze. Munich, 1901. . Die soztale und politische Bedeutung der Schulreform vom Jahre 1900. Berlin, 1905. Meyer, Jurgen Bona. Die Schultiberbiirdungsfrage. Bonn, 1882. , and Kohler, W. Die angebliche sittliche Verwtlderung der

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Jugend unserer Zeit und die behauptete Mitschuld der Schule. Bonn, 1884. Meyer, K. W. Die moderne Berechtigungsjagd auf unseren hoheren Schulen: Ernste padagogisch-militarische Bedenken. Hannover, 1885. . Die Pflege des idealen auf unseren hoheren Schulen. Berlin, 1884. Meyer, Lothar. "Ueber akademische Lernfreiheit." Nord und Siid 10 (1879:11-29. Meyer-Markau, Wilhelm. Fremdwort und Schule. Gotha, 1887. Ein Mitglied des Abgeordnetenhauses. Bemerkungen zur Realschulfrage. Berlin, 1877. Mitteilung iiber die Verhandlungen der stadtischen Behorden Berlins mit dem Zwecke der Erhaltung und Forderung der Realgymnasium. Berlin, 1894. Momtnsen, Tycho. "Sechzehn Thesen zur Frage iiber die Gymnasialreform." Preussische Jahrbiicher 34 (1874):149-174. Miiller, Otto. Zur Reform der hoheren Unterrichtsanstalten. Berlin, 1875. Miinch, Wilhelm. Eltem, Lehrer und Schulen in der Gegenwart. Berlin, 1906. . Neue padagogische Beitrage. Berlin, 1893. . Zur Forderung des franzosischen Unterrichts. 2d ed., rev. and enl. Leipzig, 1895. Muff, Christian. Humanistische und realistische Bildung. Berlin, 1901. Die nationale Reform unserer hdheren Lehranstalten. Essen and Leipzig, 1880. Nerrlich, Paul. Das Dogma vom klassichen Altertum in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig, 1894. Neubauer, Friedrich. Die Zukunft des Gymnasiums. Halle, 1900. Nietzsche, Friedrich. "Ueber die Zukunft unserer Bildungsanstalten." Werke. Part 3, Vol. 2. Edited by Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinori. Berlin and London, 1973. Nohl, Clemens. Neue Beitrage zur Schulreform. Essen, 1898. . Wider die Uhlig'sche Schrift: Die Einheitsschule mit lateinlosen Unterbau. Neuwied, 1892. . Wie kann die Ueberbiirdung unserer Jugend auf hoheren Lehranstalten mit Erfolg entgegengewirkt werden? Neuwied and Leipzig, 1882. Ein Oberdeutschen. Unsere nationale Erziehung, mit besonderem

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bezug auf die Forderungen Paul de Lagardes und des Verfassers von "Rembrandt als Erzieher." Berlin, 1891. Ohlert, Arnold. Die deutsche höhere Schule. Hannover, 1896. . Die deutsche Schule und das klassische Altertum. Hannover, 1891. Ostendorf, Julius. Mit welche Sprache beginnt zweckmdssigerweise der fremdsprachliche Unterricht? Düsseldorf, 1873. Paulsen, Friedrich. Gesammelte pddagogische Abhandlungen. Edited by Eduard Spranger. Stuttgart and Berlin, 1912. . Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts auf den deutschen Schulen und Universitaten vom Ausgang des Mittelalters bis zur Gegenwart. Leipzig, 1885. [2d ed. 2 vols. Leipzig: 1897]. Perthes, Hermann. Zur Reform des lateinischen Unterrichts auf Gymnasien und Realschulen. Berlin, 1876. Perthes, Otto. Die deutsch-konservative Partei und das hdhere Schulwesen. Bielefeld, 1892. . Die Mitschuld unseres hdheren Schulwesens an der Ueberfiillung in den gelehrten Standen. Gotha, 1889. Peters, Karl. Gesammelte Schriften. 3 vols. Munich, 1943-1944. Pfluger, Fr. W. Human- und Realgymnasium: Ein Wort zur Aufkliirung an alle Gebildeten. Chemnitz, 1882. Pflug, August. Volksschulzwang als Reform unseres hdheren Schulwesens. Berlin, 1892. Pietzker, Friedrich, and Treudein, J. P. Der Zudrang zu den gelehrten Berufsarten, seine Ursachen und etwaigen Heilmittel. Braunschweig, 1889. Pilger, Robert. Ueber das Verbindungswesen auf dem norddeutschen Gymnasium. Berlin, 1880. Preyer, Wilhelm. Biologische Zeitfragen. Berlin, 1889. . Unser Kaiser und die Schulreform: Nachgelassene Schriften. Dresden, 1900. Pudor, Heinrich. Kaiser Wilhelm II und Rembrandt als Erzieher. Dresden, 1891. Quosque Tandem [Wilhelm Vietor]. Der Sprachunterricht muss umkehren. 2d ed. Berlin, 1886. Raydt, Hermann. Die deutschen Stadte und das Jugendspiel. Hannover, 1891. . Ein gesunder Geist in einem gesunden Korper: Englische Schulbilder in deutschen Rahmen. Hannover, 1886.

(333)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Rein, Wilhelm. Kunst, Politik, Piidagogik: Gesammelte Aufsatze. 4 vols. Langensalza, 1910-1914. Reinhardt, Karl. Die Frankfurter Lehrplane. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1892. . Die Umgestaltung des hdheren Schulwesens. Frankfurt-amMain, 1892. Reisacker, A. J. Gymnasium und Realschule. Berlin, 1882. Reuleaux, Franz. Briefe aus Philadelphia. Braunschweig, 1877. Richter, Ernst Albert. Die Abiturienten der Realschulen I. O. und Gymnasien in Preussen vor dem Forum der Statistik. Altenburg, 1881. Richthofen, Emil von. Zur Gymnasial-Reform in Preussen. Magdeburg, 1887. Riedler, Alois. Unsere Hochschulen und die Anforderungen des 20. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1898. Riegel, Hermann. Ein Hauptstiick unserer Muttersprache: Mahnruf an alle national gesinnten Deutschen. Leipzig, 1883. Riehl, Wilhelm Heinrich. "Das Idyll eines Gymnasiums." Kulturgeschichtliche Charakterkopfe. 3d ed. Stuttgart, 1899. Roethe, Gustav. Humanistische und nationale Bildung: Eine historische Betrachtung. Berlin, 1906. Rothenbiicher, Adolf. Die Realschule eine allgemeine menschliche Bildungsstatte. Berlin, 1872. Schacht, Ludwig. Ueber die Gleichberechtigung der Realschule I. O. mit dem Gymnasium. Berlin, 1878. Schenckendorff, Emil von. "Die deutsche Bewegung fur erziehliche Knabenhandarbeit." Zt. fur Schulgesundheitspflege 1 (I888):25~ 30. . Praktische Unterricht: Eine Forderung der Zeit an die Schule, sein erziehlicher, volkswirtschaftlicher und socialer Werth. Breslau, 1880. , and Schmidt, F. A., ed. Ueber Jugend- und Volksspiele. Hannover, 1892. Schiller, Hermann. Aufsatze iiber die Schulreform von 1900. Wiesbaden, 1903. . Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Padagogik. 4th ed. Leipzig, 1904. . Der Schularztfrage. Berlin, 1899. . Ueber die pddagogische Vorbildung zum hdheren Lehramt: Eine akademische Antrittsrede. Giessen, 1877.

(334)

BIBLIOGRAPHY . "Die Ueberbiirdungsfrage und die Schule." Zt. fur das Gymnasialwesen 39 ( i 8 8 5 ) : i - i 4 . Schliemann, Heinrich. Ilios: The City and Country of the Trojans. London, 1880. Schmeding, Friedrich. Die klassische Bildung in der Gegenwart. Berlin, 1885. Schmelzer, Carl. Vom hdheren Schulwesen: Ein Wort an die Eltern. Essen, 1882. , and Krumme, Wilhelm. Das Schulberechtigungswesen. Bonn, 1885. Schmoller, Gustav. "Das untere und mittlere gewerbliche Schulwesen in Preussen." Zur Sozial- und Gewerbepolitik der Gegenwart: Reden und Aufsatze. Leipzig, 1890. Schoeler, Albrecht. Die religiose Erziehung unserer gebildeten Jugend und der Religionsunterricht aufunseren Gymnasien. 2d ed., enl. Giitersloh, 1891. Schonborn, Theodor. Das hdhere Unterrichtswesen in der Gegenwart. Berlin, 1885. Schottmuller, Konrad. Deutsches Stadtewesens im Mittelalter. Berlin, 1873. . Der Untergang des Templer-Ordens. 2 vols. Berlin, 1887. Schrader, Wilhelm. Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre fur Gymnasien und Realschulen. 2d ed. Berlin, 1873. . Die Verfassung der hdheren Schulen: Padagogische Bedenlken. 3d ed. Berlin, 1889. Schreyer, Hermann. Das humanistische Gymnasium und die Anforderungen der Gegenwart. Halle, 1890. Schroder, Heinrich. Der hohere Lehrerstand in Preussen. Kiel, 1899. . Oberlehrer, Richter, Offiziere. Kiel, 1897. Schusny, Heinrich. Ueber die Nervositat der Schulugend. Jena, 1895. Seeger, Heinrich. Ueber die Stellung des Gustrower Realgymnasiums zu einem Beschlusse der letzten Berliner Schulkonferenz. Giistrow, 1891. Seidel, Robert. Arbeitsunterricht. Tubingen, 1885. Steinbart, Quintin. Die Durchfiihrung der preussichen Schulreform in ganz Deutschland. Duisburg, 1907. . "Des Herrn Ministers von Gossler letztes Bedenken gegen die Erweiterung der Berechtigungen der Realgymnasien." Mitteilungen des A. D. Realschulmannervereins, no. 13 (1888).

(335)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Steinbart, Quintin. Unser Abiturienten (Fortsetzung): Ein neuer Beitrag zur Klärung der Realschulfrage. Berlin, 1881. Steinmeyer, Gustav. Betrachtungen fiber unser klassisches Schulwesen: Eine Entgegnung. Kreuzburg, 1882. Sybel, Heinrich von. Die deutschen Universitäten: Ihre Leistungen und Bedürfnisse. Bonn, 1874. Treitschke, Heinrich von. "Einige Bemerkungen über unser Gymnasialwesen." Preussische Jahrbücher 51 (1883):158-191. . Politics. Translated by Blanche Dugdale and Torben de Bille. 2 vols. New York, 1916. Uhlig, Gustav. Die Heidelberger Erklarung in Betreff der humanistischen Gymnasien Deutschlands nebst den bis zum Dezember 1888 emgelaufener Unterschriften und einem Vorworte. Heidelberg, 1888. Ullrich, Richard. "Programmwesen und Programmbibliothek der hoheren Schulen." Zt. für das Gymnasial-Wesen 61 (1907):81767. Vieweger, L. Das Einheitsgymnasium als psychologisches Problem behandelt, zugleich eine Losung der Ueberburdungsfrage auf Grundlage. Danzig, 1887. Virchow, Rudolf. Lemen und Forschen. Berlin, 1892. Volcker, Gustav. Die Reform des hdheren Schulwesens auf Grund der Ostendorfschen These: Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht ist mit dem franzosischen zu beginnen. Berlin, 1887. . Die Schule und die soziale Frage. Schonebeck, 1891. Vollhering, W. Das hohere Schulwesen Deutschlands vom Gesichtspunkte des nationalen Bedurfnisses fur Behorden, Schulmanner und Familienvater. Leipzig, 1883. Wagner, Ludwig. Unterricht und Ermiidung. Sammlung von Abhandlungen aus dem Gebiete der padagogischen Psychologie und Physiologie, vol. 1, no. 4. Berlin, 1898. Waldeyer, Wilhelm. Ueber Aufgaben und Stellung unserer Universitaten seit der Neugriindung des deutschen Reiches. Berlin, 1898. Walle, Peter. Die Schulkonferenz und das Baufach. Berlin, 1891. Weber, Max. "Wahlrecht und Demokratie in Deutschland." Gesammelte Politische Schriften. Edited by Johannes Winckelmann. 2d ed., enl. Tubingen, 1958. Week, Gustav. Das deutsche Gymnasium. Ratibor, 1874. Weinhold, Karl. Rede bei Antritt des Rectorats der Koniglichen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat. Berlin, 1893.

(336)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Wendt, Gustav. Die Gymnasien und die offentliche Meinung. Karlsruhe, 1883. Wenzel, Alfred. Der Todeskampf des altsprachlichen Gymnasialunterrichts: Eine pathologische Studie. Berlin, 1899. Wernicke, Alexander. Kultur und Schule: Praliminarien zu einem Schulfrieden. Osterwieck, 1896. . Die mathematisch-naturtvissenschaftliche Forschung in ihrer Stellung zu modernen Humanismus. Berlin, 1898. Wesche, Dr. Die Ueberburdung auf den hdheren Schulen und die Beseitigung des Nachmittags-Unterrichts. Bernburg, 1884. Wiese, Ludwig. Deutsche Briefe iiber englische Erziehung. 2 vols in 1. Berlin, 1877. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. Festrede im Namen der GeorgAugusts- Universitat zur akademischen Preisverteilung am 1. Juni 1892. Gottingen, 1892. Windegrath, Hubert. Kurzsichtigkeit und Schule. Berlin, 1890. Wislicenus, Johann. Die Abiturienten der Realgymnasien und Realschulen I. O. als Studierende an den Universitiiten. Berlin, 1881. Wittstock, Albert. Die Ueberfiillung der gelehrten Berufszweige. Langensalza, 1892. Wossidlo, Paul. Die Gutachten der deutschen Aerzte-Vereine iiber die Zulassung der Realschulabiturienten zum Studium der Medizin. N.p., 1880. Zehender, Dr. von. Ueber den Einfluss des Schulunterrichts auf Entstehung von Kurzsichtigkeit. Stuttgart, 1880. Zeller, Eduard. "Gymnasium und Universitat." Deutsche Rundschau 62 (I89O):2I7—238. Ziegler, Theobald. Notwendigkeit und Berechtigung des Realgymnasiums. Stuttgart, 1894. I X . SELECTED PRIMARY SOURCES ON OTHER COUNTRIES

Arnold, Matthew. Culture and Anarchy. Edited with an introduction by J. Dover Wilson. Cambridge, 1971. Bain, Alexander. Education as a Science. New York, 1879. Berenger, Henry. Les proletaires intellectuelles en France. Paris, n.d. Binet, Alfred, and Henri, Victor. La fatigue intellectuelle. Paris, 1898. Compayre, Gabriel. "The Reform in Secondary Education in France." Educational Review 25 (i903):i30-i45.

(337)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Demolins, Edmond. A quoi tient la superiorite des Anglo-Saxons? Paris, 1897. Dukes, Clement. Health at School. New ed., enl. London, 1887. Fouillee, Alfred. L'enseignement au point de vue national. Paris, 1891. Frary, Raoul. La question du latin. Paris, 1885. Galton, Francis. "Remarks on replies by teachers to questions re­ specting mental fatigue." Journal of the Anthropological Insti­ tute 17 (1889):157-166. Greard, Octave. Education et instruction. Vol. 3, Enseignement se­ condare. Paris, 1887. Hertel, N.T.A. Overpressure in High Schools in Denmark. Trans­ lated by C. Godfrey Sorenson. London, 1885. Key, Axel. Schulhygienische Untersuchungen. Edited by Leo Burgerstein. Hamburg, 1889. Key, Ellen. The Century of the Child. New York, 1909. Laprade, Victor. L'education homicide: Plaidoyer pour I'enfance. Paris, 1868. LeBon, Gustave. Psychologie des foules. 13th ed. Paris, 1907. . Psychology of Socialism. New York, 1899. Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary Studies. New York, 1894. Ribot, Alexandre. La reforme de l'enseignement secondaire. Paris, 1900. Spencer, Herbert. Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physical. Lon­ don, 1861. See also Cyril Bibby and Jules Simon under section V. X. SECONDARY SOURCES: GERMANY AND GENERAL WORKS

Anchor, Robert. Germany Confronts Modernization: German Cul­ ture and Society, 1790—1890. Lexington, Mass., 1972. Andernach, Norbert. Der Einfluss der Parteien auf das Hochschulwesen in Preussen1 1848-1918. Studien zum Wandel von Gesellschaft und Bildung im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, vol. 4. Gottingen, 1972. Anderson, Eugene N. "The Prussian Volksschule in the 19th Cen­ tury." Entstehung und Wandel der modernen Gesellschaft:

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Festschrift fiir Hans Rosenberg. Edited by Gerhard A. Ritter. Berlin, 1970. Anthony, Katharine. Feminism in Germany and Scandinavia. New York, 1915. Armytage, W.H.G. The German Influence on English Education. London, 1969. Ashmore, Eric. "Wilhelm von Humboldt's Ideas on the Formation of Character through Education." Paedagogica Historica 3 (1963): 5-z6. Bahlsen, Leopold. The German Emperor and the German School. New York, 1903. Balfour, Michael. The Kaiser and His Times. New York, 1972,. Balschun, Heinz. "Zum schulpolitischen Kampf um die Monopolstellung des humanistischen Gymnasiums in Preussen im letzten Drittel des 19. Jahrhunderts: Eine Studie zur Problematik des Streites um die Vorbildung zum Universitatsstudium." Inaugural Dissertation, Martin-Luther-Universitat Halle-Wittenberg, 1964. Baumgart, Peter, ed. Bildungspolitik in Preussen zur Zeit des Kaiserreichs. Preussen in der Geschichte, vol. 1. Stuttgart, 1980. Beckmann, Emmy. Die Entwicklung der hoheren Madchenbildung in Deutschland von 1870-1914 dargestellt in Dokumenten. Ber­ lin, 1936. Bertschinger, Thomas. Das Bild der Schule in der deutschen Literatur zwischen 1890 und 1914. Zuricher Beitrage zur Padagogik, vol. 9. Zurich, 1969. Biographisches Jahrbuch und Deutscher Nekrolog. 16 vols. Berlin, 1898—1914. Blattner, Fritz. Das Gymnasium: Aufgaben der hoheren Schule in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Heidelberg, i960. . "Der Historiker Friedrich Paulsen und seine Kritiker." Zt. fiir Padagogik 9 (1963): 113-130. Blankertz, Herwig. Bildung im Zeitalter der grossen Industrie: Pa­ dagogik, Schule und Berufsbildung im 19. Jahrhundert. Han­ nover, 1969. Bonner, Thomas N. American Doctors and German Universities, 1870-1914. Lincoln, Nebr., 1963. Brandau, Heinrich Wilhelm. Die mittlere Bildung in Deutsehland: Historisch-systematische Untersuchung einiger ihrer Probleme. Gottinger Studien zur Padagogik, n.s., vol. 2. Weinheim, 1959. Bruford, W. H. "The Idea of'Bildung' in Wilhelm von Humboldt's

BIBLIOGRAPHY Letters." The Era of Goethe: Essays Presented to James Boyd. Oxford, 1959. Brunkhorst, Heinz Ernst. Die Einbeziehung der preussischen Schule in die Politik des Staates (1808-1918). Diisseldorf, 1956. Budde, Gerhard. Der Kampf um die Vorherrschaft der Antike im Unterricht der hdheren Knabenschulen. Langensalza, 1910. Burchardt, Lothar. Wissenschaftspolitik im Wilhelminischen Deutschland: Vorgeschichte, Griindung undAufbau der KaiserWilhelm-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der Wissenschaften. Studien zu Naturwissenschaft, Technik und Wirtschaft im Neunzehnten Jahrhundert, vol. 1. Gottingen, 1975. Butler, E. M . The Tyranny of Greece over Germany. Cambridge,

1935Dauzenroth, Erich, ed. Frauenbewegung und Frauenbildung. Bad Heilbronn, 1964. . Kleine Geschichte der Madchenbildung. Ratingen, 1971. Derbolav, Josef, and Roessler, Wilhelm. Wesen und Werden der Realschule. Bonn, i960. Deutsches Biographisches Jahrbuch. 11 vols. Berlin and Leipzig, 1 9 Z 5 193Z.

Diehl, Carl, Americans and German Scholarship, 1770-1870. Yale Historical Publications, Miscellany, Vol. 1 1 5 . New Haven and London, 1978. Dilthey, Wilhelm. "Siivern." Gesammelte Schriften. Vol. 4. Leipzig and Berlin, 1921. Dolch, Josef. Erziehung und Erziehungswissenschaft in Deutschland und Deutschdsterreich von 1900 bis 1930. Darmstadt, 1968. . " Z u r Geschichte des Paedagogicums der Gymnasiallehrer im 19. Jahrhundert." Zeitschrift fur Padagogik 9 ( 1 9 6 3 ) ^ 0 MDunkel, Harold B. Herbart and Herbartianism. Chicago, 1970. Eley, Geoff. Reshaping the German Right: Radical Nationalism and Political Change after Bismarck. New Haven and London, 1980. . "The Wilhelmine Right: How It Changed." Society and Politics in Wilhelmine Germany. Edited by Richard J. Evans. N e w York, 1978. Eppstein, Georg von. Fiirst Bismarcks Entlassung. Berlin, 1920. Erdmann, Karl Dietrich. "Geschichte, Politik und Padagogik—aus den Akten des Deutschen Historikerverbandes." Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 19 ( i 9 6 8 ) : z - z i . (340)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eyck, Frank. The Frankfurt Parliament, 1848-49. London, 1968. Fiedler, Ralph. Die klassiscbe deutsche Bildungsidee: Ihre soziologischen Wurzeln und pddagogischen Folgen. Studien zur Soziologie des Bildungswesens, vol. 7. Weinheim, 1972. Fishman, Sterling. The Struggle for German Youth: The Search for Educational Reform in Imperial Germany. New York, 1976. Flaskamp, Franz. "Georg Hinzpeter, ein westfalischer Schulmann." Westfalische Zeitschrift 112 (1962):334-341. Flexner, Abraham. Universities: American, English, German. New York, 1930. Flitner, Andreas. Die polittsche Erziehung in Deutschland: Geschichte und Problemen, 1750-1880. Tubingen, 1957. Foerster, Erich. Adalbert Falk: Sein Leben und Wirken als Preussischer Kultusminister. Gotha, 1927. Frankfurt-am-Main, Historische Kommission. Franz Adickes: Sein Leben und sein Werk. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1929. Friedensburg, Walter. "Das Koniglich-Preussische Historische Institut in Rom in den ersten dreizehn Jahren seines bestehens." Abhandlungen der Koniglichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (1903):64-68. Fries, Wilhelm. Die Franckeschen Stiftungen in ihrem zweiten Jahrhundert. Halle, 1898. Gaudig, Hugo. "Das hohere Madchenschulwesen." Die Kultur der Gegenwart, Part 1: Die allgemeinen Grundlagen der Kultur der Gegenwart. Edited by Paul Hinneburg. Berlin and Leipzig, 1906. Gay, Peter. Weimar Culture; The Outsider as Insider. New York, 1968. Gerhard, Dietrich. "The Educational Reforms in Germany and the United States at the End of the Nineteenth Century: A Com­ parison." Gesammelte Aufsatze. Gottingen, 1977. Giese, Gerhard, ed. Quellen zur deutschen Schulgeschichte seit 1800. Gottingen, 1961. Gillis, John R. "Conformity and Rebellion: Contrasting Styles of English and German Youth, 1900-1933." History of Education Quarterly 13 (Fall 1973):249-260. Glockner, Eckhard. Zur Schulreform im preussischen Imperialismus: Preussisehe Schul- und Bildungspolitik im Spannungsfeld der Schulkonferenzen von 1890, 1900 und 1920. Glashutten im Taunus, 1976. Goebel, Klaus. "Des Kaisers neuer Geschichtsunterricht: Aende-

BIBLIOGRAPHY rungen des preussischen Lehrplans und ihre Vorgeschichte." Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 25 (1974): 7 0 9 - 7 1 7 . Gollwitzer, Heinz. Die "Gelbe Gefahr": Geschichte eines Schlagworts. Gdttingen, 1962. Griep, Gisela. "Ueberblick iiber die Knabenhandfertigkeitsbewegung in den achtziger und neunziger Jahren in Deutschland." Jahrbuch fiir Erziehungs-und Schulgeschichte 1 (i96i):i33-iji. Haines, George. Essays on German Influence upon English Education and Science, 1850-1919. Connecticut College Monographs, no. 9. Hamden, Conn., 1969. Hall, Alex. "The War of Words: Anti-Socialist Offensives and Counterpropaganda in Wilhelmine Germany, 1890-1914." Journal of Contemporary History 11 (July 1976): 11-42. Hammerich, Kurt. "Die soziale Herkunft von Schiilern als Thema schulpolitischen Argumentation: Ein Beitrag zur Analyse des sozialen Rekrutierungsfeldes ausgewahlter Schultypen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert." Kolner Zeitschrift fiir Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 32 (i98o):457-483Hanstein, Adalbert von. Das jungste Deutschland. Leipzig, 1905. Hatfield, Henry. Aesthetic Paganism in German Literature: From Winckelmann to the Death of Goethe. Cambridge, Mass., 1964. Hellige, Hans Dieter. "Wilhelm II und Walther Rathenau: Ein Gesprach aus dem Jahre 1900." Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 19 (i968):538—544. Henning, Hansjoachim. Das westdeutsche Biirgertum in der Epoche der Hochindustrialisierung, 1860-1914: Soziales Verhalten und soziale Strukturen. Part 1, Das Bildungsbiirgertum in der preussischen Westprovinzen. Wiesbaden, 1972. Herrlitz, Hans-Georg. Studium als Standesprivileg: Die Entstehung des Maturitatsproblems im 18. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt, 1973. , and Titze, Hartmut. "Ueberfiillung als bildungspolitische Strategic. Zur administrativen Steuerung der Lehrerarbeitslosigkeit im Preussen, 1870-1914." Die Deutsche Schule 63 (1976): 348-370. Herrmann, Ulrich, ed. Historische Padagogik: Studien zur historischen Bildungsokonomie und zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte der Padagogik. 14th Supplement of the Zeitschrift fiir Padagogik. Weinheim, 1977. Heydorn, Heinz-Joachim, and Koneffke, Gemot. Zur Bildungsgeschichte des deutschen Imperialismus: Einleitungen zur Neu-

(342)

BIBLIOGRAPHY herausgabe der Preussischett Schulkonferenzen 1890/1900 und der Reichsschulkonferenz von 1920. Glashiitten im Taunus, 1973. Hicks, W. R. The School in English and German Fiction. London, 1930. Hofele, K. H. "Selbstverstandnis und Zeitkritik des deutschen Biirgertums vor dem ersten Weltkrieg an Hand von Schulprogrammen." Zt. fiir Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 8 (i956):40-56. Homig, Herbert. " 'Historia vitae magistra'—Historische Aspekte der Lernzielpolitik im Geschichtsunterricht." Wissenschaft in Hochschule und Schule: Studien und Beitrage zu Grundfragen und Gestaltungsproblemen. Edited by Herbert Homig and Josef Tymeister. Cologne, 1972. Hoffmann, Dietrich. Politische Bildung, 1890-1933: Ein Beitragzur Geschichte der padagogischen Theorie. Hannover, 1970. Holl, Karl. "Das nationalsoziale Schulprogramm: Ein Schuldebatte aus den Jahren 1896 und 1897." Padagogische Rundschau 13 (i969):434-440. Huerkamp, Claudia. "Aerzte und Professionalisierung in Deutschland im neunzehnten Jahrhundert." Geschichte und Gesellschaft 6 (i98o):349~382. Jarausch, Konrad. "Liberal Education as Illiberal Socialization: The Case of Students in Imperial Germany." Journal of Modern History j o (i9y8):6o9~630. . "Die neuhumanistische Universitat und die burgerliche Gesellschaft, 1800-1870." Darstellungen und Quellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Einheitsbewegung im neunzehnten und zwanzigsten Jahrhundert. Vol. 11. Heidelberg, 1981. . "The Social Transformation of the University: The Case of Prussia, 1865-1914." Journal of Social History 12 (Summer I979):6O9~6)6.

Jeismann, Karl-Ernst. Das Preussische Gymnasium in Staat und Gesellschaft: Die Entstehung des Gymnasiums als Schule des Staates und der Gebildeten, 1787-1817. Industrielle Welt, vol. 15. Stuttgart, 1974. Jenny, Erika. Die Heimatkunstbewegung. Basel, 1934. Kasuya, Yoshi. A Comparative Study of the Secondary Education of Girls in England, Germany, and the United States, with a Consideration of the Secondary Education of Girls in Japan. New York, 1933. Keck, Rudolf W. Geschichte der mittleren Schule in Wurttemberg.

(343)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Veroffentlichungen der Kommission fiir geschichdiche Landeskunde in Baden-Wiirttemberg, ser. B, vol. 47. Stuttgart, 1968. Keller, Hans. Jugend und Erziehung in der modernen deutschen Dichtung. Lachen, 1938. Kessel, Eberhard. Wilhelm von Humboldt: Idee und Wirklichkeit. Stuttgart, 1967. Kindt, Werner, ed. Die Wandervogelzeit: Quellenschriften zur deutschen Jugendbewegung, 1896—1919. Diisseldorf and Cologne, 1968. Kocka, Jiirgen. Unternehmensverwaltung und Angestelltenschaft am Beispiel Siemens, 1847—1914: Zum Verhaltnis von Kapitalismus und Biirokratie in der deutschen Industrialisierung. Industrielle Welt, vol. 11. Stuttgart, 1969. Konig, Helmut. Imperialistische und militaristische Erziehung in den Schulstuben Deutschlands, 1870—1960. [East] Berlin, 1962. . "Der Kaiser Erlass vom 1. Mai 1889: Eine Studie zu seiner Stellung und Funktion in den antikommunistischen Bildungspolitik und Padagogik des imperialistischen Deutschlands." Jahrbuch fiir Erziehungs-und Schulgeschichte 12 (1972):58—100. Korth, Georg. Wandervogel, 1896—1906. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1967. Kraul, Margaret. Gymnasium und Gesellschaft im Vormdrz: Neuhumanistische Einheitsschule, stadtische Gesellschaft und soziale Herkunft der Schuler. Studien zum Wandel von Gesellschaft und Bildung im 19. Jahrhundert, vol. 18. Gottingen, 1980. Langsam, W . C. "Nationalism and History in the Prussian Elementary Schools under William II." Nationalism and Internationalism. Edited by E. M. Earle. New York, 1950. Laqueur, Walter. Young Germany: A History of the German Youth Movement. New York, 1962. Laube, Richard. Rudolf Hildebrand und seine Schule. Leipzig, 1903. Learned, William Setchel. The Oberlehrer: A Study of the Social and Professional Evolution of the German Schoolmaster. Harvard Studies in Education, vol. 1. Cambridge, Mass., 1914. Lehmann, Hartmut. "Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft als Vorbild: Eine Untersuchung der AHA fiber den Geschichtsunterricht an deutschen Gymnasien in den Jahren 1896/98." Kieler Historische Studien 16 (i972):384~396. Leithold, Wolfgang. "Die Entstehung des Knabenhandfertigkeitsunterrichts in Deutschland in den 80. und 90. Jahren." Jahrbuch fiir Erziehungs- und Schulgeschichte 1 (1961).

(344)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Levy, Richard. The Downfall of the Anti-Semitic Political Parties in Imperial Germany. New Haven and London, 1975. Lidtke, Vernon. "Naturalism and Socialism in Germany." American Historical Review 79 (i974):i4~37. Locke, Robert. "Industrialisierung und Erziehungssystem in Frankreich und Deutschland vor dem 1. Weltkrieg." Historische Zeitschrift 225 (i977):265—296. Loewe, Hans. Die Entwicklung des Schulkampfs in Bayem bis zum vollstandigen Sieg des Neuhumanismus. Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica, Supplement 2. Berlin, 1917. Lorenzen, Hermann, ed. Die Kunsterziehungbewegung. Bad Heilbronn, 1966. Liidicke, Reinhardt. Die preussische Kultusminister und ihre Beamten. Stuttgart, 1918. Lundgreen, Peter. "Die Bildungschancen beim Uebergang von der 'Gesamtschule' zum Schulsystem der Klassengesellschaft im 19. Jahrhundert." Zeitschrift fur Padagogik 24 ( i 9 7 8 ) : i o i - i i 5 . . "Bildung und Besitz—Einheit oder Inkongruenz in der europaischen Sozialgeschichte." Geschichte und Gesellschaft 6 (i98o):262-275. . Bildung und Wirtschaftswachstum im Industrialisierungsprozess des 19. Jahrhunderts. Historische und Padagogische Studien, vol. 5. Berlin, 1973. . "Historische Bildungsforschung." Historische Sozialwissenschaft: Beitrage zur Einfiihrung in die Forschungspraxis. Edited by Reinhard Riirup. Gottingen, 1977. . "Industrialization and the Educational Formation of Manpower in Germany." Journal of Social History 9 (i975):64~8o. . "Schule, Universitat und sozialer Wandel: Neuere Literatur zur Sozialgeschichte der Bildung." Archiv fiir Sozialgeschichte

17 ( I 977) : 5 I 7 — 537. Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Schule im Ueberblick, Part I: 1770—1918. Gottingen, 1980. , with a contribution by A. P. Thirlwall. "Educational Expansion and Economic Growth in Nineteenth-Century Germany: A Quantitative Study." Schooling and Society. Edited by Lawrence Stone. Baltimore and London, 1976. Manegold, Karl-Heinz. Universitat, Technische Hochschule und Industrie: Ein Beitrag zur Emanzipation der Technik im 19. Jahr-

(345)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

hundert unter besonderer Berucksicbtigung der Bestrebungen Felix Kleins. Berlin, 1970. Marcks, Friedrich. Oskar Jaeger. Leipzig and Berlin, 1930. Massing, Paul W. Rehearsal for Destruction: A Study of Political Anti-Semitism in Imperial Germany. New York, 1967. McClelland, Charles E. State, Society, and University in Germany, 1700-1914. Cambridge, 1980. McCormach, Russell. "On Academic Scientists in Wilhelmian Ger­ many." Daedalus 103 (1974):157-171. Meister, Richard. "Humanismus und Realismus: Geschichte eines Gegensatzpaares." Beitrage zur Theorie der Erziehung. Graz and Cologne, 1965. Menze, Clemens. "Grundziige der Bildungsphilosophie Wilhelm von Humboldts." Bildung und Gesellschaft: Zum Bildungsbegriff von Humboldt bis zur Gegenwart. Edited by Hans Steffen. Gottingen, 1971. Merkl, Peter, Political Violence under the Swastika: 581 Early Nazis. Princeton, 1975. Messer, August. Die Reformbewegung auf dem Gebiete des preussichen Gymnasialwesens von 1882 bis 1901.Leipzig and Berlin, 1901. Messerschmidt, Manfred. "Militar und Schule in der wilhelminischen Zeit." Militargeschichtliche Mitteilungen 23, no. 1 (1978):51— 76. Meyer, Folkert. Schule der Untertanen: Lehrer und Politik in Preussen, 1848-1900. Historische Perspektiven, vol. 4. Hamburg, 1976. Meyer, Ruth. "Das Berechtigungswesen in seiner Bedeutung fiir Schule und Gesellschaft im 19. Jahrhundert." Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaft 124 (1968):763-776. Milberg, Hildegard. Schulpolitik in der pluralistischen Gesellschaft: Die politischen und sozialen Aspekte der Schulreform in Ham­ burg, 1890-1935. Hamburg, 1970. Mitzman, Arthur. The Iron Cage: An Historical Interpretation of Max Weber. New York, 1969. Mosse, George. The Crisis of German Ideology: The Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich. New York, 1964. Miiller, Detlef K. "The Qualifications Crisis and School Reform in Late Nineteenth-Century Germany." History of Education 9 (1980):315-331.

BIBLIOGRAPHY . Sozialstruktur und Schulsystem: Aspekte zum Strukturwandel des Schulwesens im 19. Jahrhundert. Studien zum Wandel von Gesellschaft und Bildung im Neunzehnten Jahrhundert. Vol. 7. Gottingen, 1977. Musgrave, P. W. Technical Change, the Labour Force and Education: A Study of the British and German Iron and Steel Industries, 1860—1914. Oxford, 1967. Neuendorff, Edmund. Geschichte der neueren deutschen Leibesiibung vom Beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts bis zur Gegenwart. 4 vols. Vol. 4, Die Zeit von i860 bis 1932. Dresden, 1932. Neumann, Robert P. "Industrialization and Sexual Behavior." Modern European Social History. Edited by R. J. Bezucha. Lexington, Mass., 1972. Nichols, J. Alden, Germany After Bismarck: The CapriviEra, 18901914. Cambridge, Mass., 1958. Nohl, Hermann. Die padagogische Bewegung in Deutschland und ihre Theorie. 2d ed. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1935. O'Boyle, Lenore. "Education and Social Structure: The Humanist Tradition Reexamined." Internationales Archiv fiir Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur 1 (1976)1246-2^7. . "Klassische Bildung und soziale Struktur in Deutschland zwischen 1800 und 1848." Historische Zeitschrift 207 (1968): 584-608. . " A Possible Model for the Study of Nineteenth-Century Secondary Education in Europe." Journal of Social History 12 (i978):236-247. . "The Problem of an Excess of Educated Men in Western Europe, 1800-1850." Journal of Modern History 42 (1970):

471-495Ody, Hermann Joseph. Begegnung zwischen Deutschland, England und Frankreich im hdheren Schulwesen seit Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts. Saarbriicken, 1959. Olson, James M . "Nationalistic Values in Prussian Schoolbooks prior to World War I." Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism

1 (i973)=47-59. "The Prussian Volksschule, 1890-1914: A Study of the Social Implications of the Extension of Elementary Education." Ph.D. diss., New York Univeristy, 1971. . "Social Views of Prussian Primary School Teachers." Paedagogica Historica 15 (i975):73-89-

(347)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Palmer, Alan. The Kaiser: Warlord of the Second Reich. New York, 1978. Palmer, R. R. "Some Recent Work on Higher Education." Comparative Studies in Society and History 13 (1971):108-115. Pascal, Roy. From Naturalism to Expressionism: German Literature and Society, 1880-1918. New York, 1973. Paulsen, Friedrich. German Education, Past and Present. Translated by Theodor Lorenz. New York, 1938. . The German Universities: Their Character and Historical Development. Translated by Edward Delavan Perry. New York and London, 1895. . Geschichte desgelehrten Unterrichts auf den deutschen Schulen und Universitaten vom Ausgang des Mittelalters bis zur Gegenwart. 3d ed., exp. Edited and with an appendix by Rudolf Lehmann. Berlin and Leipzig, 1921. . "Das moderne Bildungswesen." Die Kultur der Gegenwart, Part 1: Die allgemeinen Grundlagen der Kultur der Gegenwart. Edited by Paul Hinneburg. Berlin and Leipzig, 1906. Peters, Hans. "Friedrich Althoff." Manner der deutschen Verwaltung. Cologne and Berlin, 1963. Peters, Theodor. Geschichte des Vereins Deutscher Ingenieure. Berlin, 1912. Pfaff, Wilhelm. Zum Kampf um deutsche Ersatzworter. Giessen,

1933Pfetsch, Frank R. Zur Entwicklung der Wissenschaftspolitik in Deutschland, 1750-1914. Berlin, 1974. Pross, Harry. Jugend, Eros, Politik: Die Geschichte der deutschen Jugendverbande. Bern, Munich, and Vienna, 1964. Reichle, Walter. Zwischen Staat und Kirche: Das Leben und Wirken des preussischen Kultusministers Heinrich von Miihler. Berlin, 1938. Richter, J. Die Entwicklung des kunsterzieherischen Gedankens als Kulturproblem der Gegenwart nach Hauptgesichtspunkten dargestellt. Leipzig, 1909. Richter, Wilhelm. Der Wandel des Bildungsgedankens: Die Briider von Humboldt, das Zeitalter der Bildung und die Gegenwart. Berlin, 1971. Riese, Reinhard. Die Hochschule auf dem Wege zum wissenschaftlichen Grossbetrieb: Die Universitat Heidelberg und das ba-

(348)

BIBLIOGRAPHY dische Hochschulwesen, 1860-1914. Industrielle Welt, vol. 19. Stuttgart, 1977. Ringer, Fritz K. The Decline of the German Mandarins: The German Academic Community, 1890—1933. Cambridge, Mass., 1969. . Education and Society in Modern Europe. Bloomington and London, 1979. . "The Education of Elites in Modern Europe." History of Education Quarterly 18 (1978):159-172. Ritter, Gerhard A., and Kocka, Jiirgen, ed. Deutsche Sozialgeschichte: Dokumente und Skizze. 2 vols. Munich, 1974. Rohi, John C. G. "The Disintegration of the Kartell and the Politics of Bismarck's Fall from Power." Historical Journal 9 (1966): 60-89. . Germany Without Bismarck: The Crisis of Government in the Second Reich, 1890-1900. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967. . "Higher Civil Servants in Germany, 1890-1900." Imperial Germany. Edited by James J. Sheehan. New York, 1976. Roessler, Wilhelm. "Der Einfluss Hegels auf das Schulwesen des 19. Jahrhunderts." Erkenntnis und Verantwortung: Festschrift fiir Theodor Litt. Edited by Josef Derbolav and Friedheim Nicolin. Dusseldorf, i960. . Die Entstehung der modemen Erziehungswesens in Deutschland. Stuttgart, 1961. Rosenbusch, Heinz Stephen. Die deutsche Jugendbewegung in ihrem padagogischen Formen und Wirkungen. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1973. Rost, Hans. Bibliographie des Selbstmords. Augsburg, 1927. Ruegg, Walter. "Bildung und Gesellschaft im 19. Jahrhundert." Bildung und Gesellschaft: Zum Bildungsbegriff von Humboldt bis zur Gegenwart. Edited by Hans Steffen. Gdttingen, 1972. Ruppel, Wilhelm. Ueber die Berufswahl der Abiturienten Preussens in den Jahren 1875-1899. Fulda, 1904. Rurup, Reinhard, ed. Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft: Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Technischen Universitat Berlin 1879—1979. 2 vols. Berlin, 1979. Sachse, Arnold. Friedrich Althoffund sein Werk. Berlin, 1928. Samuel, R. H., and Thomas, R. Hinton. Education and Society in Modern Germany. London, 1949. Saul, Klaus. "Der Kampf um die Jugend zwischen Volksschuie und Kaserne: Ein Beitrag zur 'Jugendpflege' im Wilhelminischen Reich,

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1890-1914." Militargeschichtliche Mitteilungen 9 (1971)-.97—

143Schallenberger, Horst. Untersuchungen zum Geschichtsbild der Wilhelminischett Aera und der Weimarer Zeit: Eine vergleichende Schulbuchanalyse deutscher Schulgeschichtsbiicher aus der Zeit von 1888 bis 1933. Ratingen bei Diisseldorf, 1964. Scheibe, Wolfgang. Die reformpadagogische Bewegung. 3d ed., enl. Weinheim, 1972. Schimmelpfennig, M. "Robert Graf von Zedlitz-Triitzschler." Zeitschrift des Vereins fiir Geschichte Schlesiens 56 (1922):74-82. Schmeding, Otto. Die Entwicklung des realistischen hdheren Schulwesens in Preussen bis zum Jahre 1933 mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der Tatigkeitdes Deutschen Realschulmannervereins. Cologne, 1956. Schmidt, Fritz. Emil von Schenckendorffs Verdienste um die korperliche Erziehung der deutschen Jugend. Leipzig, 1919. Schnabel, Franz. Deutsche Geschichte im neunzehnten Jahrhundert. 4 vols. Freiburg im Breisgau, 19 29-19 3 7. . Das humanistische Bildungsgut im Wandel von Staat und Gesellschaft. Munich, 1956. Schoeps, Hans-Joachim. "Das wilhelminische Zeitalter in geistesgeschichtlicher Sicht." Zeitgeist im Wandel: Das wilhelminische Zeitalter. Stuttgart, 1967. Schiissler, Wilhelm. Bismarcks Sturz. Leipzig, 1921. Schwabe, Karl. Quintin Steinbart: Blatter der Erinnerung der 29. Delegiertenversammlung des Allgemeinen Deutschen Realschulmannervereins gewidmet. Berlin, 1912. Schweim, Lothar, ed. Schulreform in Preussen, 1809—1819. Kleine padagogische Texte, vol. 30. Weinheim, 1966. Seidler, Eduard, and Kindt, Hildburg. "Die 'Ueberburdung' der Kinder als Problem der friiheren Kinderpsychologie." Gesnerus 30 (i973):i6o-i76. Sengling, Dieter. Das Problem der Ueberforderung im Kindes- und Jugendalter. Marburger Padagogische Studien, vol. 6. Weinheim and Berlin, 1967. Sienknecht, Helmut. Der Einheitsschulgedanke: Geschichtliche Entwicklung undgegenwartige Problematik. Padagogische Studien, vol. 26. Weinheim, 1968. Sochatzy, Klaus. Das neuhumanistische Gymnasium und die reinmenschliche Bildung: 2 Schulreformversuche in ihrer weiterrei-

(350)

BIBLIOGRAPHY chenden Bedeutung. Studien zum Wandel von Gesellschaft und Bildung im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, vol. 6. Gottingen, 1973. Spranger, Eduard. 25 Jahre deutscher Erziehungspolitik. Berlin, 1916. . Wilhelm von Humboldt und die Reform des Bildungswesens. 3d ed. Tubingen, 1965. Steiner, Dr. Andreas. "Das nervose Zeitalter": Der Begriff der Nervositat bei Laien und Aerzten in Deutschland und Oesterreich um 1900. Zurich, 1964. Stern, Fritz. Gold and Iron: Bismarck, Bleichroder, and the Building of the German Empire. New York, 1977. . The Politics of Cultural Despair: A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology. Garden City, N.Y., 1965. Stock, Phyllis. Better Than Rubies: A History of Women's Education. New York, 1978. Struve, Walter. Elites Against Democracy: Leadership Ideals in Bourgeois Political Thought in Germany, 1890-1933. Princeton, 1973. Sweet, Paul R. Wilhelm von Humboldt: A Biography, vol. I: 1767— 1808. Columbus, 1978. Taylor, A.J.P. The Course of German History. 2d ed. London, 1961. Thomas, Carla R. "Philosophical Anthropology and Educational Change: Wilhelm von Humboldt and the Prussian Reforms." History of Education Quarterly 13 (i973):2i9-230. Titze, Hartmut. Die Politisierung der Erziehung: Untersuchungen iiber die soziale und politische Funktion der Erziehung von der Aufklarung bis zum Hochkapitalismus. Frankfurt-am-Main, 1973. Treue, Wilhelm. " Z u r Gesellschafts- und Berufsgeschichte des deutschen Ingenieurs." Technikgeschichte 45 (i978):27~36. Treutlein, Peter. Geschichtliche Entwicklung des Einjahrig-Freiwilligen Berechtigungswesens in Deutschland. Hamburg, 1891. Varrentrapp, Conrad. Johannes Schulze und des hdhere preussische Unterrichtswesen in seiner Zeit. Leipzig, 1899. Vereinigung zur Veranstaltung von Gymnasialkursen fur Frauen. Geschichte der Gymnasialkurse fur Frauen zu Berlin. Berlin, 1906. Vierhaus, Rudolf. "Bildung." Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland. Edited by Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, and Reinhard Koselleck. Vol. I. Stuttgart, 1972. . "Zeitgeschichte und Zeitkritik im essayistischen Werk Karl Hillebrands." Historische Zeitschrift 221 (i975):304-324-

(351)

BIBLIOGRAPHY Wahl, Adalbert. Deutsche Geschichte. 4 vols. Stuttgart, 1916-1936. Wehler, Hans-Ulrich. Das Deutsche Kaiserreich, 1871-1918. Deutsche Geschichte, vol. 9. Gottingen, 1973. . Modernisierungstheorie und Geschichte. Gottingen, 1975. Weil, Hans. Die Entstehung des deutschen Bildungsprinzip. Bonn, 1930. Werner, Lothar. Der Alldeutsche Verband, 1890—1918. Historische Studien, vol. 278. Berlin, 1935. Weymar, Ernst. Das Selbstversteindnis der Deutschen: Ein Bericht über den Geist des Geschichtsunterrichts der höheren Schulen im 19. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart, 1961. Whittle, Tyler. The Last Kaiser: A Biography of Wilhelm II, German Emperor and King of Prussia. New York, 1977. Zahn-Harnack, Agnes von. Adolf von Harnack. Berlin, 1936. Ziegler, Theobald. Die geistigen und socialen Strdmungen des 19. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1899. Zorn, Wolfgang. "Hochschule und hohere Schule in der deutschen Sozialgeschichte der Neuzeit." Spiegel der Geschichte: Festgabe fur Max Braubach. Edited by Konrad Repgen and Stephen Skalweit. Munster, 1964. Zymek, Bernd. Das Ausland als Argument in der padagogischen Reformdiskussion: Schulpolitische Selbstrechtfertigung, Auslandspropaganda, intemationale Verstandigung und Ansdtze zu einer vergleichertden Erziehungswissenschaft in der internationalen Berichterstattung deutscher padagogischer Zeitschriften, 18711952.. Ratingen, 1975.

X I . SELECTED SECONDARY SOURCES ON OTHER COUNTRIES

Alston, Patrick L. Education and the State in Tsarist Russia. Stanford, Calif., 1969. Anderson, Robert D. "The Conflict in Education: Catholic Secondary Schools (1850-1870): A Reappraisal." Conflicts in French Society: Anticlericaltsm, Education and Morals in the Nineteenth Century. Edited by Theodor Zeldin. London, 1970. . Education in France, 1848—1870. Oxford, 1975. . "Secondary Education in Mid-Nineteenth-Century France: Some Social Aspects." Past and Present 53 (1971): 12.1-146. Annan, N. G. "The Intellectual Aristocracy." Studies in Social His-

(351)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

tory: A Tribute to G. M. Trevelyan. Edited by J. H. Plumb. London and New York, 19s5. Armytage, W.H.G. Four Hundred Years of English Education. Cam­ bridge, 1964. Ashby, Eric. Technology and the Academics: An Essay on Univer­ sities and the Scientific Revolution. London, 1959. Bamford, T. W. The Rise of the Public Schools: A Study of Boys' Public Boarding Schools in England and Wales from 1837 to the Present Day. London, 1967. Barnard, H. C. A History of English Education from 1760. 2d ed. London, 1961. Bougie, C. The French Conception of "Culture generate" and Its Influences upon Instruction. New York, 1938. Brower, Daniel R. Training the Nihilists: Education and Radicalism in Tsarist Russia. Ithaca and London, 1975. Burstyn, Joan N. "Education and Sex: The Medical Case Against Higher Education for Women in England, 1870-1900." Pro­ ceedings of the American Philosophical Society (April 1973): 79-89. Bush, John W. "Education and Social Status: The Jesuit College in the Early Third Republic." French Historical Studies 9 (1975): 115-140. Byrnes, Robert F. Antisemitism in Modern France. Vol. 1, The Pro­ logue to the Dreyfus Affair. New Brunswick, N.J., 1950. Campbell, F. "Latin and the Elite Tradition in Education." Sociology, History and Education: A Reader. Edited by P. W. Musgrave. London, 1970. Charrier, Edmee. L'evolution intellectuelle feminine. Paris, 1931. Citron, Suzanne. "Enseignement secondaire et ideologie elitiste entre 1880 et 1914." Le mouvement social 96 (1976):81-101. Clarke, M. L. Classical Education in England, 1500—1900. Cam­ bridge, 1959. Curtis, S. J. History of Education in Great Britain. 6th ed. London, 1965. Day, C. R. "Education, Technology and Social Change in France: The Short, Unhappy Life of the Cluny School, 1866-1891." French Historical Studies 8 (1974):427-444. . "Technical and Professional Education in France: The Rise and Fall of l'enseignement secondaire special, 1865-1902." Journal of Social History 6 (1972/1973):177-199.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Digeon, Claude. La crise allemande de la pensee frangaise. Paris, 1959· Eaglesham, E.J.R. The Foundations of Twentieth-Century Education in England. New York, 1967. Falcucci, Clement. L'humanisme dans I'enseignement secondaire en France au XIXc Steele. Toulouse and Paris, 1939. Farrington, Frederic Ernest. French Secondary Schools. London, 1910. Gershmann, Sally Tiesdell. "Ernest Lavisse and the Uses of Nation­ alism, 1870-1914." Ph.D. diss., University of Missouri, 1978. Harrigan, Patrick J. "French Catholics and Classical Education after the Falloux Law." French HistoricalStudies 8 (1973):255-278. . "Secondary Education and the Professions in France during the Second Empire." Comparative Studies in Society and History 17 (1975)=349-371Isambert-Jamati, Viviane. Crises de la societe, crises de I'enseigne­ ment: Sociologie de I'enseignement secondaire franqaise. Paris, 1970. . "La formation pedagogique des professeurs a la fin du dixneuvieme siecle." Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 67 (1970):261-294. . "Une reforme des lycees et colleges: Essai d'analyse sociologique de la reforme de 1902." L'annie sociologique, 3d ser., 20 (1969):9-60. Kamm, Josephine. Hope Deferred: Girls' Education in English His­ tory. London, 1965. Kazamias, A. M. Politics, Society and Secondary Education in Eng­ land. Philadelphia, 1966. Krug, Edward A. The Shaping of the American High School, 18801920. New York, 1964. McClelland, James C. Autocrats and Academics: Education, Culture, and Society in Tsarist Russia. Chicago and London, 1979. Midwinter, Eric. 19th Century Education. New York, 1970. Newsome, David. Godliness and Good Learning: Four Studies on a Victorian Ideal. London, 1961. Ogilvie, R. M. Latin and Greek: A History of the Influence of the Classics on English Life from 1600 to 1918. London, 1964. Oliphant, James. "Secondary Education of Girls in France." Great Britain Board of Education. Special Reports on Educational Subjects, vol. 24. London, 1911.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ponteil, Felix. Histoire de I'enseignement en France: Les grandes etapes. Paris, 1966. Prost, Antoine. Histoire de I'enseignement en France, 1800-1967. Paris, 1969. Ralston, David B. The Army of the Republic: The Place of the Mil­ itary in the Political Evolution of France, 1871—1914. Cam­ bridge, Mass., and London, 1967. Robertson, A. B. "Children, Teachers and Society: The Overpressure Controversy, 1880-1886." British Journal of Educational Stud­ ies zo (1972):315-323. Rothblatt, Sheldon. The Revolution of the Dons: Cambridge and Society in Victorian England. New York, 1968. Searle, G. R. The Quest for National Efficiency: A Study in British Politics and Political Thought, 1899-1914. Berkeley, 1971. Sinel, Allen. The Classroom and the Chancellery: State Educational Reform in Russia under Count Dmitry Tolstoi. Chicago and London, 1979. Soloway, Richard Allen. "Neo-Malthusians, Eugenists, and the De­ clining Birthrate in England, 1900-1918." Albion 10 (Fall 1978): 264-286. Spivak, Marcel. "Le developpement de l'education physique et du sport frar^ais de 1852 a 1914." Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine 24 (1977):28-48. Stock, Phyllis H. "Students versus the University in Pre-World War Paris." French Historical Studies 7 (Spring 1971):93-110. Talbott, John E. The Politics of Educational Reform in France, 19181940. Princeton, 1969. Wilkinson, Rupert. Gentlemanly Power: British Leadership and the Public School Tradition. London, 1964. Zeldin, Theodor. France: 1848—1945. 2 vols. Oxford, 1973—1977.

INDEX

Abitur, 18-19, 22, 40, 221 academic proletariat. See overcrowded professions Adams, Henry, 36-37, 41-42, 43 Adickes, Franz, 236, 261 Albrecht, Paul, 195, 277 Alsace-Lorraine, 77n, 139n Altenstein, Karl von, 22, 121 Althoff, Friedrich, 264-268, 271, 274, 276-277, 284, 286, 287, 290 Altona plan, 248n Anchor, Robert, 6 anti-Semitism, 103, 147, 260-261, 264 architects, concern with status of, 30, 86, 227 Arendt, Otto, 61, 164, 202, 229 army, and secondary education, 206-207, 268, 309. See also cadet academies; one-year-volunteer privilege; unfit volunteers Arnold, Matthew, 10, 38-40, 43, 297 art education movement, 259-260 Association for a Comprehensive School, 78-79, 161, 22J Association for Latin-less Secondary Schools, 111, 278 Association for Lower-Case Latinic Handwriting, 204 Association for Rational School Reform and School Hygiene, 257n Association for Women's University Studies, 278 Augusta Victoria, Kaiserin, 206, 290 Avenarius, Ferdinand, 49, 160

Baden, 66n, 252-253 "ballast," 87-98, 128, 182, 246 Bavaria, 25, 238 Bebel, August, 98 Benningsen, Rudolf von, 177 Berlepsch, Hans Hermann von, 196, 197, 231, 235 Bernhardi, Ernst, 102, 106 Beumer, Wilhelm, 161 Bezold, Wilhelm von, 78, 277n Bigelow, Poultney, 174 Bildung, 16-18, 25-26, 109-110, 136, 165-166, 248. See also Greek instuction; Latin instruction Billroth, Theodor, 73 Binding, Rudolf, 49, 51 Bismarck, Herbert von, 188 Bismarck, Otto von, ion, 159-160, 179-183, 185, 308-309; and the overcrowded professions, 102104, 167, 182, 191-192; and secondary teachers, 148, 188, 258; and fighting socialism in the schools, 181, 183 Bliiher, Hans, 55 Bodelschwingh, Friedrich von, i63n, 176, 177, i8in, 205-206, 2zi, 227 Boetticher, Karl von, 95-96 Bogolepov, N., 155 Bohtz, Oskar, 221, 2650 Bonitz, Hermann, 60, 69, 78-79, 86, 186 Borght, Richard von der, 277n Bosse, Robert, 214, 238, 247, 248, 249, 256, 260, 265-269 Bourgeois, Leon, 295

(357)

INDEX Boyen, Hermann von, 26 Braunschweig Declaration, 279 Breal, Michel, 38-39, 41, 43 Brecht, Arnold, 49, 52 Bryce Commission, 1 1 , 299, 303 Buddenbrooks (Thomas Mann), 43-44 Bueck, Henry Axel, 90 Biilow, Bernhard von, 243, 269^ 284, 287 Bundesrat, 72, 253, 266-267, 286, 287 Burgess, John W., 37 Butler, Nicholas Murray, 209 cadet academies, 77, 189, 272-273 Caprivi, Leo von, 196, 235, 236n Cauer, Paul, 254, 279 Central Association for Physical Fitness, 122 Central Association of German Industrialists, 161 Central Committee for Boys' Handicrafts, 135 Central Committee for the Furthering of Popular and Youth Games, 134-135 Chamberlain, Houston Stewart, 174 chambers of commerce, 90, 160 civic training, 24, 50-51, 145-146, 156, 184, 254-256. See also history instruction Clarendon Commission, 297 Cohn, Dr. Hermann, 124, 129, 278 Cologne Industrialists' Association, 63, 262 Colonial Association, 63 Committee of Seven, 227, 230-231, 238 Committee of Ten (USA), 1 1 , 155 common foundation, 91-94, 220, 281, 285, 189-290. See also Reformgymnasium

Conrad, Johannes, 99, 101, 105, 198 Corinth, Lovis, 49 country boarding schools, 160-161, 306 Crown Council. See Ministry of State Curtius, Ernst, 156 Curtius, Ludwig, 51 David, Eduard, 47 Deiters, I98n de la Croix, Richard, 264 Delbriick, Hans, 156 Diels, Hermann, 177a, 282 Dilthey, Wilhelm, 162, 198, 207, 212-213, 277 Douglas, Count Hugo, 209, 220, 2-77

DuBois-Reymond, Emil, 71, 72, 142-143 Durkheim, Emile, 303 Duruy, Victor, 293-294 Education and Society in Modem Europe (Ringer), 12 Education of German Youth, The (G'issfeldt), 152-153 Eickhoff, Richard, 287 Eitner, Gustav, 134 Ende, Harmann, 218 England: secondary education in, 33-35, 297-300; overburdening in, 121; patriotism in schools in, 154-155, 298-299; "ballast" in, 298; inclusiveness in, 300 English instruction, 282, 285 Esmarsch, Dr. Wilhelm von, 78, 194, 198, 278 Executive Committee for German School Reform, 159-160 Falk, Adalbert, 60, 69, 70, 76, 7879, 84-85, 113, 143

(358)

INDEX Fiedler, Heinrich, 217, 227 first-class Realschulen (1859-1882): definition of, 30; numbers of, 30. 62; privileges of graduates of, 30, 66; enrollments in, 62; social origins of pupils in, 62; graduates of, as students, 70. See also Realgymnasium Fischer, Emil, 177n Fischer, Karl, 261 Foerster, Friedrich Wilhelm, 49 Fontane, Theodor, 156 Forckenbeck, M a x von, 228 foreign language instruction, 39, 131-132, 231 Förster, Bernhard, 147 France: secondary education in, 3335, 293-297; overcrowded professions in, 103, 295; overburdening in, 120, 294; patriotism in schools in, 154; "ballast" in, 295; inclusiveness in, 297 Frankfurt Parliament, 26n Frenssen, Gustav, 47-48 Freuttd Hein (Strauss), 44 Freytag, Gustav, 156, 162 Frick, Otto, 131, 199, 220 Friedrich III, 163, 172-174 Friedrich Wilhelm 111, 121 Frommel, Emil, 156, 190, 205, 215-216, 219, 220, 227 Friihlings Erwachen (Wedekind), 43-44 Funck, Baron von, 272, 273, 274, 277, 281

General German Realschulmänner Association. See Realschulmanner Association Gerlach, Helmut von, 47 German Academic Union, 158, 204 German Association for Boys' Handicraft Instruction, 135

German Association for Higher Girls' Schools, 114 German Brown Coal Industry Association, 160 German Engineers' Association, 8283, 87, 92, 160, 250, 262, 278 German Historians' Congress, 254 German instruction, 50-51, 140158, 237, 256 German Language Association, 150, 156 German Physicians' Association, 75, 82. See also physicians Germar, Christian, 281, 282n Gewerbeschulen, 29, 84 girls' schools, 33, 112-117, 251253, 290; in other countries, 302-303 Glockner, Eckhard, 9 Gneist, Rudolf, 156, 162 Goering, Hugo, 152-153, 166-167, 1 7 8 . I95> " 9 > " O , 277N

Gossler, Gustav von, 60, 75, 85, 115, 157-158, 222, 227; and the "ballast," 94-97, 166; and privileges for modern schools, 95, 166, 231-232; opposes reformers, 105-106, 163-166, 189, I99n; and overburdening, 137139, 188; and Wilhelm II, 177, 18in, i88n, 232-233; and the Cabinet Order of 1889, 181-182, 185; and teachers, 188, 189; prepares the school conference of 1890, 192-201 Gossler, Heinrich von, 268 Gottingen Union for the Advancement of Applied Physics and Mathematics, 250 Graf, Dr. Eduard, 61, 75, 202, 215. " 5 . 227, 230 Greek instruction, 20, 39, 47-48, 109-110, 132-133, 281-282. See also Bildung

(359)

INDEX Grimm, Hermann, 140, 145 Gruhl, Emil, 265n Gussfeldt, Paul, 152-153, 157, 178179. 190. 195, Gurlitt, Ludwig, 52, 261, 304 Gymnasium: curriculum of, 20, 21, 13, 14, 75, 1 4 1 , 1 3 0 , 1 3 7 ; numbers of, 1 1 , 85, 187-288; privileges of graduates of, 1 3 , 1 6 ; enrollments in, 61, 88n, n 8 n , 245, 246, 187-188 Gymnasium Association, 203, 22913°. J-39. 163, 279 gymnastics. See physical education Haeckel, Ernst, 78, 148, 160 Hammerstein, Ernst von, 268 handicrafts, 24, 135 Harnack, Adolf von, 156, 276, 277, 280, 282-283 Hart, Heinrich, 5 Hartmann, Eduard von, 69 Hartwich, Emil, 122-123, 133, 135-136, 175 Hartwig, Theodor, 211, 214 Hasse, Dr. Paul, 122, 124 Hauck, Guido, 277n Heeremann, Baron von, i98n Heidelberg Declaration, 162 Helmholtz, Hermann von, 71-73, 197. 224 Herbartianism, 131 Hermes, deputy, 87 Herrfurth, Ludwig, 196 Hertel, Niels, 120 Hesse, Hermann, 44 Heydebrand von der Lasa, Ernst, 277 Heyden, Wilhelm von, 232 Heyse, Paul, 156, 162 higher Burgerschulen (1832-1859), 29-30 higher Burgerschulen (1859-1882), 30. See also Realprogymnasium

higher Bürgerschulen (1882-1890), 84, 97. See also Realschulen Hillebrand, Karl, 80-81 Hinzpeter, George, 172-174, 177, 183, 190, 195, 201, 209, 214, 222, 225, 227, 271-273, 277, 280, 284 history instruction, 24, 39, 49-50, 140-158, 237, 154-255, 282283, 185. See also civic training History of Scholarly Instruction (Paulsen), 108-109, 112 Hitler, Adolf, 305-306 Hoffmann, Heinrich, 161 Hofmann, August Wilhelm, 197 Hohenlohe-Schillingsfiirst, Prince Chlodwig zu, 177, 167, 173, 275 Holzmiiller, Gustav, 1 1 1 , 117, 1 1 1 , 248 homosexuality, 55 Hopfner, Ernst, 221, 265n Hornemann, Ferdinand, 199-200 House of Deputies (Prussia), 61, 86, 87, 94, 202, 229, 247, 251, 258; Education Committee of, 65, 66, 67, 202, 229 Humboldt, Wilhelm von, 19-21 Huxley, T. H., 37 indusiveness: definition of, 12; in Prussia, 88, 297; in France, 297; in England, 300 Intze, Otto, 270 Jaeger, Oskar, 61, 82, 93, 127, 143, 156, 161, 203, 215, 219, 229, 239, 254, 177-179, 280, 283 Jarausch, Konrad, 305 Kaltenborn, General Hans von, 206 Kaselowsky, 218 Kayser, Paul, 195-196, 198 Kerr, Alfred, 47

(360)

INDEX Kessler, Count Harry, 48, 52 Key, Axel, 120 Klein, Felix, 250, 277 Koch, Robert, 205 Kdgel, Rudolf, 156 Köpke, Reinhold, 267, 281 Kopp, Archbishop, 198n, 225, 226 Kospoth, Count, 277 Kraul, Margaret, 28 Kropatscheck, Hermann, 102, 157, 202, 203, 219, 221, 227, 230, 254, 266, 277, 282 Krupp, Friedrich, 161 Kubler, Otto, 272, 274 Kuster, Koarad, 158-160

Ludwig, Emil, 51, 52 Lundgreen, Peter, 12n, 28n, 63n Luther, Hans, 4 6

Lagarde, Paul de, 80-81, 147-148 Landmann, 263 Langbehn, Julius, 151, 190 Lange, Friedrich, 147, 158-160, 166, 188, 191, 195, 202, 205, 283 Lange, Helene, 114-117, 253 Lange, Konrad von, 259-260 Langerhans, deputy, 105-106 language purification, 149-150, 156 Laprade, Victor, 120 Laqueur, Walter, 261 Latin instruction, 39, 131-13 2. See also Bildung Launhardt, Wilhelm, 270 lawyers, and Realgymnasium privileges, 67, 262, 273-274, 283 LeBon, Gustave, 103 Lessing, Theodor, 49 Lichtwark, Alfred, 259 Lietz, Hermann, 260-261 Lorinser, Dr. C. S., 121 Lucanus, Hermann von, 177, 191, 212-213 Lucius von Ballhausen, Baron Robert, 96, 177, 196 Liiders, Karl, 217 Ludwig, Carl, 203-204

131, 235 Meinecke, Friedrich, 49, 51, 53 Meinertz, Ott, 265n, 281 mental illness, 122, 124, 138-139 Mevissen, Gustav von, 31 Michaelis, Georg, 47, 52 Miliutin, Dmitri, 301 Ministry of State (Prussia), 76, 85, 185, 192, 196, 231, 235-236, 237, 267, 268, 269, 274, 275, 286 Miquel, Johannes, 122, 126, 231, 235, 264, 268; as supporter of the Reformgymnasium, 247, 267,

Mann, Heinrich, Professor Unrat, 4 4 , 54

Mann, Thomas, 47, 123; Buddenbrooks, 43-44 Manteuffel, Edwin von, 77n Mass Petition for Thoroughgoing School Reform, 158-166 mathematics instruction, 48-49 Matthias, Adolf, 94, 111, 156, 222, 265, 268 Maybach, Alfred von, 85, 86, 96,

2.75

Moltke, Hellmuth von, 201 Mommsen, Theodor, 69, 156, 197, 203, 256, 269, 277, 280, 282283 Mommsen, Tycho, 68-69, 94 Morier, Robert, 172 Moscow Pedagogical Society, 303 Mosler, Domherr, 198n Miihler, Heinrich von, 60, 65, 66 Miiller, Detlef, 8, 28, 62n, 89, 92n, 97n, 102n, 200n, 226n Musil, Robert, Die Verwirrunger des Zoglings Torless, 44

(361)

INDEX Naumann, Friedrich, 45, 249 Navy League, 255 nearsightedness, 124 New German School, The (Goering), 152-153 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 79-80, 155 Nobling, Karl, 102 Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, 162-163, t64, 167, 186 Oberrealschulen: origins of, 84-85; numbers of, 85, 246, 288; privileges of graduates of, 85-87, 96, 223, 231-232, 236, 280, 286; enrollments in, 87, 246, 288; graduates of, as students, 288289 O'Boyle, Lenore, 9 Oncken, Hermann, 162 one-year-volunteer privilege, 26-27, 90-91, 182, 196, 200, 221, 282 Ostendorf, Julius, 91 Ostwald, Wilhelm, 203-204 overburdening, 23, 42, 119-139 passim, 256-257; in other countries, 120-121; and the six-year examination, 246, 256. See also mental illness; nearsightedness; suicides; unfit volunteers overcrowded professions, 98-108, 164, 244-245. See also teachers, oversupply of Paehler, i98n Pan-German League, 255 Paulsen, Friedrich, 10, 32, n o , 130, 199, 202, 205, 218, 222223, 240, 256, 258, 278, 292, 304; History of Scholarly Instruction, 108-109, 112 Paulsen, Rudolf, 49 Perthes, Hermann, 131, 176 Peters, Karl, 149

Peters, Theodor, 158-160, 166, 188, 191, 195, 202, 205 Philologists' and Schoolmasters' Convention, 134, 143, 263 physical education, 24, 41, 52-53, 133-135. 137-138. 237. physicians: certification of, 72, 76; concern with status of, 67, 7576, 253, 283. See also German Physicians' Association Pictures of the Socialist Future (Richter), 104 political parties, and secondary education, 61 Pomeranian Provincial Synod, 204 Preyer, Wilhelm, 127, 133, 139, 142, 148, 160, 166, 195 professors: opposed to semiclassical schools, 65, 70, 203; critical of science instruction, 65, 71, 78, 203-204; opposed to German Language Association, 156; opposed to the Mass Petition, 162 Professor Urtrat (Heinrich Mann), 4 4 . 54

progressiveness, 12 Progymnasien, 28, 288 Puttkamer, Robert von, 60, 124, 136-137 Raabe, Wilhelm, 162 Rathenau, Walther, 272 Realgymnasium: curriculum of, 77, 230, 237; numbers of, 85, 245, 288; enrollments in, 97n, 22811, 245, 288; privileges of graduates of, 107, 234, 262, 267-268, 280, 286; graduates of, as students, 107, 288-289. See also first-class Realschulen Realprogymnasium, 84, 245, 288. See also higher Burgerschulen (1859-1882) Realschulen, 84, 221; enrollments

(362)

INDEX in, 228n, 246; privileges of graduates of, 231-232, 236; numbers of, 246, 288. See also first-class Realschulen; higher Biirgerschulen (1882-1890); secondclass Realschulen Realschulmanner Association, 63, 64, 72, 77, 1 0 6 , 1 6 1 , 1 6 6 , 1 7 7 , 187-188, 205, 225, 228, 248 Reformgymnasium, 236, 247, 263265, 274-275, 289. See also common foundation Rehrmann, 217 Reichensperger, August, 61, 123 Rein, Wilhelm, 131, 260, 278 Reinhardt, Karl, 236, 281 religious instruction, 221 Rembrandt as Educator (Langbehn), 151, 190 Reuleaux, Franz, 83 Reuscher, mayor, 229 Ribot Commission, i t , 295-296 Richter, Eugen, Pictures of the Socialist Future, 104 Richthofen, Emil von, 178 Rickert, Heinrich, 66n, 249 Riedler, Alois, 250, 270, 278 Riegel, Hermann, 149-150 Ringer, Fritz, 12-13, z 6n, 88, 306 Roosevelt, Theodore, 8 in Royal Scientific Deputation for Medical Affairs, 138, 256 Russell, James E., 40, 42, 43 Russia: secondary education in, 3435, 300-302; nihilist students in, 103; overburdening in, 121, 301; patriotism in schools in, 155 Saxony, 238-239 Schacht, Hjalmar, 46 Schauenburg, Eduard, 64, 218, 234 Schenckendorff, Emil von, 134135, 158-160, 164, 166, 195, 205, 215, 220, 224, 229

Scherer, Wilhelm, 141 Schiller, Hermann, 131, 195, 220, 231 Schlee, Ernst, 64, 218, 236 Schliemann, Heinrich, 132-133 Schmeding, Friedrich, 64 Schmelzer, Karl, 164, 166 Schmidt, Erich, 156 Schmoller, Gustav, 32, 90, 156, 198 Schneider, Karl, 115, 185, 204n, 209-210, 219, 265n Scholz, Adolf von, 96, 196 Schonstedt, Karl Heinrich von, 266, 273, 275, 286 schoolboy fraternities, 54, 136-137, 256n school conference of 1873, 60, 143 school conference of 1890: origins of, 192-194; invitation list for, 194-195, 197-198; agenda for, 199-201; proceedings of, 208225 school conference of 1900: origins of, 272; agenda for, 276; invitation list for, 277; proceedings of, 279-283 school novels, 43-45 School Reform Association, 166, 167n,188, 225, 229, 239, 248, 249, 278 School Reform Association "New German School," 166-167 Schottmüller, Konrad, 178-179, 191, 197-198, 201, 209, 210, 220, 222, 227, 277 Schrader, Wilhelm, 73, 94n, 194, 195, 199, 203, 217, 229 Schulze, Georg, 222 Schulze, Johannes, 22-23, z9 Schweitzer, Albert, 47 science instruction, criticism of, 65, 71-72, 78, 83, 20X, 203-204

(363)

Schroder, Heinr

INDEX Scientists' and Physicians' Convention, 127, 257 Seckendorff, Baron von, 273, 274, 277. 281 second-class Realschulen, 30. See also higher Burgerschulen (18821890) Sedan Day celebrations, 51, 143, 145 segmentation, 12-13, ^3n, 97, 311312 Seyffardt, Ludwig Friedrich, 63, 87, 164, 194, 198, 229 Silesian Trade Association, 204 Simon, Jules, 40, 41, 120, 294 Slaby, Adolf, 270, 272 Social Policy Association, 90 Society for German Colonization, 149 Sombart, Werner, 47 Spielhagen, Friedrich, 156 sports. See physical education Spranger, Eduard, 53 Stauder, Johann, 186, 194, 200101, 216-217, 218-219, 230, 233-234, 246, 264 Steinbart, Quintin, 64, 107, 160, 195 Stengel, Eduard, 234 Stenography Association, 204 Stoecker, Adolf, 147 Strauss, Emil, Freund Hein, 44 students: social origins of, 27, 99a, io;n; show effects of overburdening, 126 Studt, Konrad von, 268, 271-275, 279-280, 284, 286 suicides, 125-126, 138, 139, 188, 304 Siivern, Johann, 22, 23n Sweden, 93-94, 120 Sybel, Heinrich von, 72, 156, 162 Taunton Commission, 297-298

teachers: training and certification of, 21, 130-131, 189; opinions about, 39-40, 51-52; shortages of, 65-66; oversupply of, 100101, 244-245, 287; pay and status of, 188, 196-197, 221, 225, 238, 258, 282, 287; overburdening of, 257-258 technical institutes: prestige of, 31, 82, 269; enrollments in, 83, 101, 245, 289; professors at, and the Gymnasium, 204, 218, 227-228; proposed entrance examination for, 223, 237-238; granting of doctorates by, 250, 270 Thiel, Hugo, 217 Thoma, Ludwig, 49-50, 53 Tirpitz, Admiral Alfred von, 243, 267 Tobler, Adolf, 70, 215, 220, 224 Tolstoi, Dmitri, 155, 301 Treitschke, Heinrich von, 69, 81, 155-156, 162, 202 Uhlhorn, Abbot, 205, 227 Uhlig, Gustav, 94, 156, 162, 195, 199, 203, 215, 219, 229, 254, 263-264 unfit volunteers, 123, 138, 304 universities, enrollments in, 99, 100, 244-245.189 Unterm Rod (Hesse), 44 Victoria, Crown Princess and Empress, 114, 172-174 Vietor, Wilhelm, 131-13 2, 160, 195, 234, 278 Virchow, Rudolf, 71, 72, 101, 129, 156, 197, 215, 224, 240, 277 Vogt, Karl, 71 Volkmann, Dietrich, 156, 218-219 Vorschulen, 32, 61, 138, 249 Wagner, Adolf, 162

INDEX Waldersee, Count Alfred von, 179, 210, 222 Wandervogel. See youth movement Weber, Max, Sr., 161 Weber, Max, Jr., 32 Wedekind, Frank, Frühlings Erwachen, 43-44 Wehrenpfennig, Wilhelm, 197, 217, 222, 237, 265n Weiss, Bernhard, 277n Werner, Anton von, 160 Weymar, Ernst, 143 Wiese, Ludwig, 24, 30, 60, 65-67, 130, 141 Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von, H I , 239-240, 248, 276, 277, 283 Wildenbruch, Ernst, 156 Wilhelm II: and the conference of 1890, 3, 180, 185, 197, 209214, 224-225, 235; education of, 172-175; and religious instruction, 172, 177-178, 180, 224225; and Greek instruction, 174, 175, 176, 210, 269; and overburdening, 174, 175, 201, 211, 269; and history instruction, 175, 176, 180, 187, 211, 269, 305; and the Realgymnasium, 176, 212, 235; and fighting socialism in the schools, 177, 180, 210; and the "ballast," 192, 196, 212; and Gossler, 193, 232-233;

and the overcrowded professions, 212; and teachers, 212, 225; and the cadet academies, 224-225, 268-269, 27 ; evaluation of, 241-242, 308; and the technical institutes, 269-270; and the conference of 1900, 271-272, 279, 283-286 Wilson, Woodrow, 81n Windelband, Wilhelm, 162 Windhorst, Ludwig, 61, 73 Winterstein, Eduard von, 47 Wolf, Friedrich August, 20-22 women students, 252, 290-291 Women's Welfare Association, 204 Women Teachers' Association, 251 Wundt, Wilhelm, 162 Württemberg, 25, 139n, 238 Yorck von Wartenburg, Count Paul, 191 youth movement, 261, 304 Zedlitz-Neukirch, Octavio von, 61, 190 Zedlitz-Triitzschler, Count Robert von, 232-238 Zeitschrift für SchulgesundheitsPflege, 136 Zeller, Eduard, 73, 93-94, 156, 162, 195, 197, 198, 203, 224, 230

(365)

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING IN PUBLICATION D A T A

Albisetti, James C., 1949Secondary school reform in imperial Germany. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Education, Secondary—Germany—History. LA725.A64 1983 373-43 81-12223 ISBN 0-691-05373-1

I.

Tide.