1 Lawrence Stone, “Literacy and Education in England, 1640–1900,” Past and Present 42 (1969): 69.

2 For example, two standard accounts of the Prussian reform movement do not mention schooling. See Ford, G. S., Stein and the Era of Reform in Prussia, 1807–1815; (Princeton, 1922)Google Scholar, and Simon, W. M., The Failure of the Prussian Reform Movement, 1807–1819 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1955).Google Scholar

3 Wilhelm Harnisch, Der jetzige Standpunkt des gesammten Preussischen Volksschulwesens (Leipzig, 1844), pp. 259–60.

4 Calvin Stowe, The Prussian System of Public Instruction and Its Applicability to the United States (Cincinnati, 1836), p. 17.

5 Cousin, Victor, “Report on the State of Public Instruction in Prussia,” in Reports on European Education, ed. Knight, E. W. (New York, 1930), pp. 123–240.Google Scholar

6 Barnard, H. C., A History of English Education: From 1760, 2nd ed. (London, 1963), p. 66.Google Scholar

7 Bruford, W. H., Germany in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, 1935), p. 123.Google Scholar

8 See Beeking, Joseph, Familien- und Anstaltserziehung in der Jugendfürsorge (Freiburg i.Br., 1925), pp. 131–58.Google Scholar

9 Tischer, Heinz, Geschichte des deutschen Volksschullesebuchs (Erlangen, 1969), p. 81.Google Scholar

10 Schwartz, P., Der erste Kulturkampf in Preussen um Kirche und Staat (1788–1798) (Berlin, 1925), p. 54.Google Scholar

11 See article on “Resewitz” in Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB), 28: 241–45.

12 Flitner, A., Die politische Erziehung in Deutschland (Tübingen, 1957), pp. 49–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Gagliardo, J. G., From Pariah to Patriot: The Changing Image of the German Peasant, 1770–1840 (Lexington, Ky., 1969).Google Scholar

14 Quoted in Ergang, R. R., The Potsdam Führer (New York, 1941), p. 142.Google Scholar For a detailed review of Prussian school decrees see Spranger's, Eduard, Series “Der Zusammenhang der deutschen Schulgesetzgebung und Schulverfassung,” Die Deutsche Schule 18–20 (1914–1916).Google Scholar

15 See Vollmar, F., Die preussiche Volksschulpolitik unter Friedrich dem Grossen (Berlin, 1918).Google Scholar

16 Quoted in Bär, Max, Westpreussen unter Friedrich dem Grossen (Berlin, 1909; reprinted. Osnabrück, 1965), 1: 550.Google Scholar

17 Kabinettsordre of Sept. 9, 1779. See Vollmar, Die preussiche Volksschulpolitik, p. 217.

18 Heinemann, M., Schule im Vorfeld der Verwaltung (Göttingen, 1974), pp. 152–69.Google Scholar See also Dilthey, W., Friedrich der Grosse und die deutsche Aufklärung, in Dilthey, Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 3, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart and Göttingen, 1959), pp. 158–70.Google Scholar

19 Schwartz, Der erste Kulturkampf, pp. 94–95; and Valjavec, F., “Das Woellnerische Religionsedikt und seine geschichtliche Bedeutung,” Historisches Jahrbuch 72 (1953): 386–400.Google Scholar

20 Title 12 of the Allgemeine Landrecht.

21 Reports on this were consistent throughout the century and were confirmed by a 1798 investigation conducted by the OSK. See Schultze, J., Die Mark Brandenburg, 5 (Berlin, 1969): 130–33.Google Scholar

22 Kabinettsordre of July 3, 1798. See Tews, J., Ein Jahrhundert preussischer Schulge schichte (Leipzig, 1914), p. 39.Google Scholar

23 Quoted in Thiele, Gunnar, Die Organisation des Volkschul- und Seminarvesens in Preussen, 1809–1819 (Leipzig, 1912), p. 3.Google Scholar

24 Quoted in Thiele, Gunnar, Geschichte der Preussichen Lehrerseminare, pt. 1 (Berlin, 1938), p. 203.Google Scholar

25 See Lüttgert, G., Preussens Unterrichtskämpfe in der Bewegung von 1848 (Berlin, 1924), pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

26 Schleiermacher was criticizing an elaböration of Massow's plan by another OSK official. For the criticism in full, published in the “Jenaischer Literaturzeitung,” see Lichtenstein, E., ed., F. E. D. Schleiermacher, Ausgewählte pädagogische Schriften (Paderborn, 1959), pp. 13–17.Google Scholar

27 Kabinettsordre of Dec. 31, 1803. See B. Gebhardt, Die Einführung der Pestalozzischen Methode in Preussen (Berlin, 1896), p. 11.

28 Meinecke, Friedrich, Das Zeitalter der deutschen Erhebung (1795–1813), 6th ed. (Göttingen, 1957), p. 14.Google Scholar

29 Brunschwig, Henri, Enlightenment and Romanticism in Eighteenth Century Prussia, trans. Jellinek, F. (Chicago, 1974), p. 1.Google Scholar Adam Smith had seen education as a way of dealing with poverty and population growth; see his Wealth of Nations, Modern Library edition (New York, 1937), pp. 737, 740.

30 Shorter, E., “Sexual Change and Illegitimacy: The European Experience,” in Bezucka, R., ed., Modern European Social History (Lexington, Mass., 1972), pp. 231–69Google Scholar; Knodel, J., “Law, Marriage and Illegitimacy in Nineteenth-Century Germany,” Population Studies 20 (1966–1967): 279–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Küther, C., Räuber und Gauner in Deutschland (Göttingen, 1976), pp. 13–29.Google ScholarBoehme, H., Prologomena zu einer Sozial-und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Deutschlands im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt, 1968), p. 40.Google Scholar

31 Hagen, W. W., “The Partitions of Poland and the Crisis of the Old Regime in Prussia, 1772–1806,” Central European History 9 (1976): 115–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 Liedtke, M., Pestalozzi (Hamburg, 1968), pp. 89ff.Google Scholar

33 Wirth, Louis, “Preface” to Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (New York, 1936), p. xxv.Google Scholar

34 See Harnack, Adolph, Geschichte der Königlichen Akadamie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1 (Berlin, 1900): 372, 417–20.Google Scholar

35 See Hennes, E., Die Volkserziehungslehre bei Herder und bei Vertreter des gebildteten Mittelstandes des 2. Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts (Bonn, 1918), pp. 21, 58–59.Google Scholar The prize was divided between two essayists taking opposite positions.

36 Quoted in R. F. Eylert, Charakter-Züge und historische Fragmente aus dem Leben des Königs von Preussen, Friedrich Wilhelm III, vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Magdeburg, 1843), pp. 321–22.

37 Quoted in Marcuse, H., Reason and Revolution (London, 1941), p. 36.Google Scholar

38 Hardenberg quoted in Thielen, P. G., Karl August von Hardenberg, 1750–1822 (Cologne, 1967), pp. 176–77.Google Scholar

39 For the emancipation edict announcing the creation of a “free people,” see Huber, E. R., Dokumente zur deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart, 1961), p. 40.Google Scholar

40 Arndt, E. M., “Der Bauernstand, politisch betrachtet,” in Arndts Werke, vol. 10, ed. Steffens, Wilhelm, (Berlin, n.d.), p. 3.Google Scholar

41 Fichte, J. G., Addresses to the German Nation, trans. Jones, R. F. and Turnbill, G. H. (Chicago, 1922), p. 3.Google Scholar

42 See Stein's, “Politisches Testament,” in Hubatsch, W., ed., Freiherr vom Stein, Briefe und amtliche Schriften vol. 2, pt. 2 (Stuttgart, 1960), p. 992.Google Scholar

43 Fischer, F., Ludwig Nicolovius (Stuttgart, 1939), pp. 256–57.Google Scholar

44 From a memorandum by Gneisenau (probably 1807), reprinted in Jeismann, K.-E., ed., Staat und Erzielumg in der preussichen Reform, 1807–1819 (Göttingen, 1969), p. 11.Google Scholar

45 Schrötter to Pestalozzi on Sept. 11, 1808, reprinted in Gebhardt, Einführung, p. 17.

46 See “Zeller,” in ADB, 45: 28–32.

47 Stein to Schrötter on Oct. 16, 1808. See Fischer, Nicolovius, pp. 264–65.

48 W. Dilthey, “Süvern,” in ADB, 37:206–45. Dilthey's sketch of Süvern is an excellent, if dated, introduction to the politics of Prussian schooling.

49 Fischer, Nicolovius, pp. 256–58.

50 Gebhardt, Einführung, pp. 75–76.

51 Humboldt, Wilhelm von, Werke, vol. 4, ed. Flitner, A. and Giel, K., (Stuttgart, 1960), p. 226.Google Scholar

52 Quoted in Moffatt, M. M., Queen Louisa of Prussia (New York, 1907), pp. 278–79.Google Scholar

53 Lichtenstein, E., “Aus dem Krisenjahr der Pestalozzischulreform in Preussen,” Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 1955, pp. 83–108Google Scholar; E. Hollack and F. Trommau, Geschichte des Schulwesens der königlichen Haupt- und Residenzstadt Königsberg (Königsberg, 1899), pp. 471ff.; Dilthey, “Süvern,” pp. 220–22.

54 Humboldt to Natorp on May 23, 1809, quoted in Lichtenstein, “Krisenjahr,” p. 85. Also Schoeps, H.-J., Neue Quellen zur Geschichte Preussens im 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1968), p. 40.Google Scholar

55 Natorp to Vincke on Dec. 3, 1810, in Lichtenstein, “Krisenjahr,” p. 103.

56 Thiele, Organisation, p. 97.

57 Natorp to Vincke on Dec. 4, 1810, in Lichtenstein, “Krisenjahr,” pp. 101–2. Lancaster developed an instructional method known as the monitorial or mutual approach, by which a single instructor could teach a lesson to as many as a thousand children. He began by teaching the lesson to monitors who in turn relayed the lesson to the pupils. Natorp believed for a time that Lancasterian and Pestalozzian methods could be combined.

58 For the Natorp-Schleiermacher disagreement see Kade, F., Schleiermachers Anteil an der Entwicklung des preussichen Bildungswesens von 1808–1818 (Leipzig, 1925), pp. 22, 136.Google Scholar

59 Natorp's “Grundriss eines Schullehrer-Seminariums für die Kurmark,” reprinted in Thiele, Organisation, pp. 162–75.

60 Natorp's “Grundriss zur Organisation der Elementarschulen,” reprinted in Thiele, Organisation, pp. 145–61.

61 Madame de Staël-Holstein, Germany (Boston, 1887), p. 129.

62 Haller's attack in the “Göttingen Gelehrter Anzeiger” (Apr. 1811) quoted in Dilthey, “Süvern,” p. 225. For background see Liedtke, Pestalozzi, pp. 154–55.

63 Quoted in Heer, F., The Intellectual History of Europe, trans. Steinberg, J. (Garden City, N.Y., 1966), 2: 271.Google Scholar Goethe also used the imagery of a Babylonian Tower of Confusion to portray the “horrible influence which the damnable [Pestalozzian] system breeds.” Quoted in Lewisohn, L., ed., Goethe: The Story of a Man, 2 (New York, 1949): 238–39.Google Scholar

64 See articles on Snethlage, Eylert, and Wittgenstein in ADB.

65 Srbik, H. Von, Metternich, vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Munich, 1957), p. 582.Google Scholar

66 “Promemoria des Bischofs Eylert über eine Reform des Schul- und Kirchenwesens,” Oct. 16, 1819, in Lenz, Max, Geschichte der Königlichen Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität zu Berlin, 4 (Halle, 1910): 380–90.Google Scholar

67 From the “Promemoria” to Süvern's draft. See Giese, G., Quellen zur deutschen Schulgeschichte seit 1800 (Göttingen, 1961), pp. 90–93.Google Scholar

68 Eylert, Charakter-Züge, p. 212.

69 Eylert, Charakter-Züge, p. 377.

70 See Lichtenstein, ed., Schleiermacher …pädagogische Schriften, p. 311.

71 Flitner, Die politische Erziehung, p. 95.

72 Brunnengräber, H., Ludolf von Beckedorff: Ein Volksschulpädagoge des 19. Jahrhunderts (Düsseldorf, 1929), p. 28.Google Scholar

73 Walker, M., Germany and the Emigration, 1816–1885 (Cambridge, Mass., 1964)Google Scholar, chap. 1; Wrigley, E. A., Population and History (New York, 1969), p. 154Google Scholar, speaks of the problem in eastern Germany as being on the verge of “Irish severity.”

74 Beckedorff's opinion reprinted in Schweim, L., ed., Schulreform in Preussen, 1809–1810 (Weinheim/Bergstrasse, 1966), p. 226.Google Scholar

75 Brunnengräber, Beckedorff, p. 35; Fischer, Nicolovius, p. 422.

76 “Promemoria von Beckedorff, Eylert, Snethlage und Schultz,” Feb. 15, 1821, reprinted in Lenz, Geschichte, p. 390.

77 Brunnengräber, Beckedorff, pp. 17, 40–41.

78 Kabinettsordre of July 7, 1822. See Nüchter, F., “Die geschichtliche Entwicklung der Lehrerbildung,” Schule und Gegenwart 3 (1951): 47.Google Scholar

79 L. Beckedorff, “Über den Begriff der Volksschule,” Jahrbücher des Preussiehen Volks Schul-Wesens 1 (1825): 24–39, esp. 32. Hereafter cited as Jahrbücher.

80 “Tabellarische Nachweisung sämmtlicher Preussichen Haupt-Seminarien,” Jahrbücher 1 (1825): 128–48.

81 Order of Jan. 13, 1824, for Posen. See “Fortschritte des Volksschulwesens im Grossherzogthum Posen,” Jahrbücher 1 (1825): 81.

82 “Reglement für das evangel. Schullehrer-Seminar zu Mörs,” Jahrbücher 1 (1825): 157. For the role of religion in conservative pedagogical thought, see Gleich, M., Die Pädagogik des preussischen Konservativismus in der Epoche seiner Entstehung (Münster, 1933), pp. 42–48.Google Scholar

83 Eylert, Charakter-Züge, p. 379.

84 These objections had been articulated in response to Süvern's bill, but they applied to Beckedorff's policies as well.

85 Kabinettsordre of May 14, 1825. See F. W. Niedergesäss, Das Elementarschulwesen in den Koniglich Preussischen Staaten: Eine Zusammenstelhung der gültigen Gesetze, Verordnungen, Erlasse und Verfügungen das Elementarschulwesen betreffend (Crefeld, 1847), p. 216. Not all children had to attend the Volksschule. The higher levels of society had their own private schools, or even private tutors.

86 Ford, F., “The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era: How Much of a Watershed?” American Historical Review 69 (1963): 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87 S. N. Eisenstadt, a leading modernization theorist, defines modernization as “the process of change towards those types of social, economic, and political systems that have developed in western Europe and North America” during the past several centuries. See his Modernization: Protest and Change (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1966), p. 1. The most far-reaching attempt to link modernization directly to education is by West, E. G., Education and Industrialization (New York, 1975).Google Scholar

88 Lundgreen, P., “Educational Expansion and Economic Growth in Nineteenth Century Germany: A Quantitative Study,” in Stone, L., ed., Schooling and Society (Baltimore, 1976), pp. 20–66.Google Scholar

89 For a devastating critique of modernization theory, see Tipps, Dean C., “Modernization and the Comparative Study of Societies,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 15 (1973): 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

90 Coleman, J. S., ed., Education and Political Development (Princeton, N.J., 1965), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

91 Quoted in Thiele, Organisation, p. 20.

92 Coleman, Education, p. 30.

93 Humboldt, Werke, 4: 212.

94 Anderson, R. T., Traditional Europe: A Study in Anthropology and History (Belmont, Ca., 1971), p. 166.Google ScholarGraves, Robert sees as one of the functions of myth, “to justify an existing social system.…“ See Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology (New York, 1959), p. v.Google Scholar

95 For an analysis of the industrialists' complaint see Kiehn, L., “German Education and Economy in the Nineteenth Century,” in The Yearbook of Education 1956, ed. Hall, R. K. and Lauwreys, J. A. (New York, n.d.), pp. 485–94.Google Scholar

96 The charge was made by Ferdinand Stiehl. See Jeismann, K.-E., “Volksbildung und Industrialisierung als Faktoren des sozialen Wandels im Vormärz,” Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 18 (1972): 323.Google Scholar Under Stiehl the so-called “Realien” (natural science, modern history, etc.) were reduced to three hours per week, and religion was accorded six hours per week. See Spranger, E., Zur Geschichte der deutschen Volksschule (Heidelberg, 1949), pp. 43–4.Google Scholar Similar adjustments were made in the Seminar curriculum. See “Regulativ für die Vorbildung evangelischer Seminar-Präparanden” of Oct. 2, 1854, in Deutsches Zentral Archiv II (Merseburg) Rep. 76 VII neu Sekt. 7C Gen. Teil I Nr. 1 Bd. 6 Bl. 115–20.

97 Wallace, A. F. C., “Schools in Revolutionary and Conservative Societies,” in Anthropology and Education, ed. Gruber, F. C. (Philadelphia, 1961), pp. 25–54.Google Scholar

98 Jackson, P. W., Life in Classrooms (New York, 1968), pp. 33–34.Google Scholar