thorough. This he ascribes to the more intense and more thorough training that Latin affords.[1] In fact, this contention is amply proved by the above mentioned results obtained in the Technical Institutes.
The following testimony of a distinguished German writer, who had a large experience in this matter, may claim the attention of all educators. Dr. Karl Hildebrand writes: "If it were conceivable that a youth should entirely forget all the facts, pictures, and ideas he has learned from the classics, together with all the rules of Latin and Greek grammar, his mind would still, as an instrument, be superior to that of one who has not passed through the same training.[2] To give an example, I may state that in my quality of inspector it was my duty to visit a very large number of French lycées and colleges, each of which is usually connected with an école speciale or professionelle, and here I found that the classical pupils, without exception, acquired more English and German than the others, in less than a quarter of the time. (The time devoted to living languages was six hours a week for four years in the special, and only one hour and a half a week for three years in the classical schools.) The same fact struck me in my visits to the German,
- ↑ Die Mathematik im Reform-Gymnasium. Neue Jahrbücher, 1901, vol. VIII, pp. 190-218.
- ↑ The same idea is well expressed by Edw. Thring in his Theory and Practice of Teaching: "The trained mind is like a skilled workman with his tools, the mind merely stocked with knowledge is like a ready made furniture shop. The one needs but a small outlay to equip, and when equipped he can always produce the things he wants. The other is costly to provide, and when provided is good only for the exact articles it contains." The Month, February 1886.
