XII The Teaching of History
A. The Teaching of American History
Function of the teacher of history
History as a science attempts to explain the development of civilization. The investigator of the sources of history must do his part in a truly scientific spirit. He must examine with the utmost scrutiny the many sources on which the history of the past has its foundation. He reveals facts, and through them the truth is established.
But history is more than a science. It is an art. The investigator is not necessarily a historian, any more than a lumberman is an architect. The historian must use all available material, whether the result of his own researches or that of others. He must weigh all facts and deduct from them the truth. He must analyze, synthesize, organize, and generalize. He must absorb the spirit of the people of whom he writes and color the narrative as little as possible with his own prejudices. But the historian must be more than a narrator; he must be an interpreter. As an interpreter he should never lose sight of the fact that all his deductions should be along scientific lines. Even then he will not escape errors. In pure science error is inadmissible. In history minor errors of fact are unavoidable, but their presence need not seriously affect the general conclusions. In spite of many misstatements of fact, a historical work may be substantially correct in the main things—in presenting and interpreting with true perspective the life and spirit of the people of whom it treats.
The historian must be more than a chronicler and an interpreter. He must be master of a lucid, virile, attractive literary style. The power of expression, indeed, must be one of his chief accomplishments. The old notion, it is true, that history is merely a branch of literature is quite as erroneous as the later theory that history is a pure science and must be dissociated from all literary form.
The teacher of history as the teacher of the evolution of civilization
The pioneer investigator who patiently delves into sources and brings to light new material deserves high praise, but far rarer is the gift of the man who sees history in its true perspective, who can construct the right relationships and can then reproduce the past in compelling literary form. A historian without literary charm is like an architect who cares only for the utility and nothing for the grace and beauty of his building.
The chronological point of view
The history teacher who slavishly follows old chronological methods has not kept pace with modern progress; but the teacher who has discarded the chronological method has ventured without a compass on an unknown sea. Chronology, the sequence of events, is as necessary in history as distance and direction in geography.
The economic point of view
A modern school of history teachers would make economics the sole background of history, would explain all historic events from the economic standpoint—to which school this writer does not belong. Economics has played a great part in the course of human events, but it is only one of many causes that explain history. For example, the Trojan War (if there was a Trojan War), the conquests of Alexander, the Mohammedan invasions, were due chiefly to other causes.
The culture viewpoint
Nor would we agree with the school of modern educators who would eliminate the culture studies from the curriculum, retaining only those which make for present-day utilitarianism. A general education imparts power and enlarges life, and such an education should precede all technical and specialized training. If a young man with the solid foundation of a liberal education fail in this or that walk of life, the fault must be sought elsewhere than in his education. The late E. H. Harriman made a wise observation when he said that though a high school graduate may excel the college graduate in the same employment for the first year, the latter would at length overtake and pass him and henceforth remain in the lead.
Aims of history in the college curriculum
The uses of the study of history are many, the most important of which perhaps is that it aids us in penetrating the present. Our understanding of every phase of modern life is no doubt strengthened by a knowledge of the past. It is trite but true to say that the study of history is a study of human nature, that a knowledge of the origin and growth of the institutions we enjoy makes for a good citizenship, that the study of history is a cultural study and that it ranks with other studies as a means of mental discipline. Finally, the reading of history by one who has learned to love it is an abiding source of entertainment and mental recreation. It is one of the two branches of knowledge (the other being literature) which no intelligent person, whatever his occupation, can afford to lay aside after quitting school.
What can the study of American history give the college student?
The most important historical study is always that of one’s own country. In our American colleges, therefore, the study of American history must take precedence over that of any other, though an exception may be made in case a student is preparing to teach the history of some other country or period. It must not be forgotten, however, by the student of American history that a study of the European background is an essential part of it.
From its very newness the history of the United States may seem less fascinating than that of the older countries, and, indeed, it is true that the glamour of romance that gathers around the stories of royal dynasties, orders of nobility, and ancient castles is wanting in American history. But there is much to compensate for this. The coming of the early settlers, often because of oppression in their native land, their long struggle with the forest and with the wild men and wild beasts of the forest, the gradual conquest of the soil, the founding of cities, the transplanting of European institutions and their development under new environment—the successful revolt against political oppression and the fearless grappling with the problem of self-government when nearly all governments in the world were monarchical—these and many other phases of American history furnish a most fascinating story as a mere story.
To the college student American history must be presented as evidence of the success of democracy
But to the student of politics and history the most unique and interesting thing, perhaps, in American history lies in the fact that the United States is the first great country in the world’s history in which the federal system has been successful—if we assume that our experimental period has passed. Perhaps the greatest of all governmental problems is just this: How to strike the right balance between these opposing tendencies—liberty and union, democracy and nationality—so that the people may enjoy the benefits of both. The United States has, no doubt, come nearer than any other country to solving this problem, and the fact greatly enhances the interest in our history. This is a question of political science rather than of history, it is true, but the history of any country and its government are inseparably bound together.
Utilitarian value
In the regular college curriculum there should be, in my opinion, two courses in American history.
Organization of courses and methods of teaching
Course I—about 3 hours for one academic year (6 semester-hours) in the freshman or sophomore year, covering the whole story of the United States. About one third of the year’s work should cover the Colonial and Revolutionary periods. Of the remaining two thirds of the year I should devote about half to the period since the Civil War.
This course should be required of all students taking the A.B. degree and in all other liberal arts courses; an exception may be made in the case of those taking certain specialized scientific courses—for these students, the history required in the high school may be deemed sufficient.
In this course a textbook is necessary, and if the class is large it is desirable that the text be uniform. The text should be written by a true historian with broad and comprehensive views, by one who knows how to appraise historic values, and, if possible, by one who commands an attractive literary style. If the textbook is written by Dr. Dry-as-dust, however learned he may be, the whole burden of keeping the class interested rests with the teacher; and, moreover, many of the students will never become lovers of the subject to such a degree as to make it a lifelong study.
The exclusive lecture system is intolerable, and the same is true of the quiz. A teacher will do his best work if untrammeled by rules. He should conduct a class in his own way and according to his own temperament. It is doubtful if the teacher who carefully plans and maps out the work he intends to present to the class is the most successful teacher. A teacher who is free, spontaneous, without a fixed method, ready in passing from the lecture to the quiz and vice versa at any moment, quick in asking unexpected questions, will usually have little trouble in keeping a class alert. Above all, a teacher of college history must explain the meaning of things with far greater fullness than is possible in a condensed textbook, and it is a most excellent practice to ask opinions of members of the class on almost all debatable questions that may arise. The reason for this is obvious.
The usual method of the writer, in as far as he has a method, is to spend the first fifteen or twenty minutes of the class hour in hearing reports from two or three students on special topics that have been assigned them a week or two before, topics that require library reference work and that could not possibly be developed from the textbook. These topics are not on the subject of the day’s lesson, but of some preceding lesson. After commenting on these reports and often asking for opinions and comments of the class, we plunge into the day’s lesson.
The use of a current periodical in class should be encouraged. It brings the learner into direct contact with life and often illuminates the past.
Current events as presented in the daily papers should often be the subject of comment, but the daily newspaper is not suitable for class use. Even the weekly is, for several reasons, less desirable than the monthly. It must not be forgotten that the basal, fundamental work of the class is, not to keep posted on current affairs, but to study the elements under the guidance of a textbook and an inspiring teacher to interpret it. The weekly is less accurate than the monthly and less literary in form, and, moreover, it comes too often. It is apt to take too much time from the study of the fundamentals. The use of the periodical in the history class has probably come to stay and it should stay, but it should be only incidental and supplementary.
Course II should be given in the junior or senior year. It should be elective, should cover at least two year-hours, and should be wholly devoted to the national period of American history. Only those having taken Course I should be eligible to this class.
Every student who expects to read law, to enter journalism or politics, or to teach history or political science should take this course. The class will be smaller than in Course I. Uniform textbooks need not be required, or the class may be conducted without a text. Most of the work must be done from the library.
It is assumed that the members of this class have a good knowledge of the narrative, and it is needless to follow it closely again. A better plan is to choose an important phase of the history here and there and study intensively. Much use should be made of original sources such as Presidents’ messages, Congressional Record, speeches and writings of the times, but the class must not ignore the fact that a vast amount of good material may be had from the historians. It must also be remembered that original research is for the graduate student and the specialist rather than for the undergraduate.
Testing the results of instruction
In conclusion, I shall explain a method of examination that I have frequently employed with apparently excellent results. Two or three weeks before the time of the examination I give the class a series of topics, perhaps fifty or more, carefully chosen from the entire subject that has been studied during the semester. Instead of having the usual review of the text, we talk over these subjects in class during the remainder of the semester. The examination is oral, not written. The time for examination is divided into three, four, or five minute periods, according to the number in the class. When a student’s name is called, he comes forward and draws from a box one of the topics and dilates on it before the class during his allotted time. If he fails on the first topic he may have another draw, but his grade will be reduced. A second failure would mean a “flunk,” unless the class marks are very high.
There are three or four real advantages in this form of examination: (1) It saves the teacher hours of labor in reading examination papers; (2) the teacher, in selecting the topics, omits the unimportant and chooses only the salient, leading subjects such as every student should master and remember; (3) the student, knowing that no new questions will be sprung for the examination, will be almost sure to be prepared on every question. Failures under this system have been much less frequent than under the old system of written examinations; (4) it practically eliminates all chance of cheating in examination.
Henry W. Elson
Thiel College
B. Modern European History
History to be taught as an evolutionary process
Teaching European history in colleges is, in many ways, not different from teaching any other history. In each instance it is to be remembered that history includes all activities of man and not merely his political life, that facts and data are not intrinsically valuable but are merely a means to an end, that the end of history is to inform us where man came from, what experiences he passed through, and chiefly, what were the fundamental forces behind his experiences. The emphasis should be put on the stimuli—economic, political, religious, or social—that lead man to act, instead of narrating his action. In a word, not what happened or when it happened, but why it happened, is of importance in college history. Stressing the stimuli in history will almost inevitably lead to treating history as a continuous or evolutionary process, which of itself greatly increases the interest of the subject.
Because history is an evolution it must explain the present
It is highly desirable that in teaching modern history very much more time be given to recent history than has generally been the case. Frederick William I showed that he accepted this when he instructed the tutors of Frederick (later the Great) to teach the history of the last fifty years to the exactest pitch. So important is this that, even when teaching early periods, constant contrasts or comparisons with present conditions should be made, and the descent of ideas and institutions to modern times should be sketched, as it shows the student that remote events or institutions have a relationship to current life.
Disciplinary values of history
Certain special aims of history have been advocated. It is held to be of disciplinary value, especially in strengthening the memory. Though this is true, it is hardly a good reason for studying history, as the memory can be perfected on almost anything, on the dictionary, poetry, formulæ, family records, gossip, or cans on grocery shelves, some of which may indeed be of more practical value than dates. In college, at least, history should aim to explain social tendencies and processes in a rational way rather than to develop the memory. The latter method tends to make the student passive and narrow, the former requires cerebration and develops breadth and depth of vision. Understanding history, rather than memorizing it, has cultural value. To be sure, understanding presupposes information; but where there is a desire to understand, the process of seeking and acquiring the information is natural and tends to care for itself.
History is not a prerequisite to professional careers in the way mathematics is to engineering; still, special periods, chiefly the modern, are highly useful to lawyers, journalists, publicists, statesmen, and others, each of whom selects what he finds most useful to his purposes.
Organization of courses in history—What to teach in the beginning course
The point of view in history teaching is more material than the machinery or methods employed. These must and should vary with persons and conditions. Ordinarily, however, it seems preferable to offer some part of European history as the first-year college course, because students have usually had considerable American history in high school, and the change adds new interest. Whether this course be general, medieval, or modern European history is of little importance, though, of course, medieval should precede modern history. In any case, the course should offer the student a good deal more than he may have had in high school, if for no other reason than to justify the profound respect with which he ordinarily comes to college. It should come often enough a week to grip the student, especially the history major.
Gradation of courses determined by content
Gradation of courses in history on the basis of subject matter is largely arbitrary, and turns upon the method of presentation. General courses naturally precede period courses. A sound principle is to select courses adapted to the stages of the student’s development. On this principle it has already been suggested that the first college course should be, not American but European history. English, ancient, medieval, or modern history immediately suggest themselves, with strong arguments in favor of the first if but one freshman course is offered, as it forms a natural projection of American history into the past. Beyond this, what subject matter is offered in the several years is largely a matter of local convenience, as the college student understands the general history of all nations or periods about equally well. It is now clear, however, that the student should know more modern and contemporary European history than he has been getting, and the sound training of an American of the future should include thorough training in modern European history.
Gradation of courses may be determined by method of teaching
Gradation based on the method of presentation is more nearly possible. Graduate courses presuppose training in the auxiliary sciences, in the necessary languages, in research methods, in the special field of research, as well as a knowledge of general history. This establishes a sort of sequence of the methods to be employed, irrespective of subject matter.
Method of teaching introductory courses—Lecture method
The lecture method is convenient for the elementary courses, especially if, as is so often the case, these have a large number of students. It cannot, however, be gainsaid that convenience or, worse still, economy is a weak argument in favor of the lecture course, especially for the first-year student. To him the lecture method is unknown, and he flounders about a good deal if he is left to work out his own salvation; and then, too, just when he needs personal direction and particularly when, as a youth away from home for the first time, he needs some definite and unescapable task that shall teach discipline and duty as well as give information, the lecture system gives him the maximum of liberty with the minimum of aid or direction. These considerations strongly advocate small classes for freshmen, frequent recitations, discussions, tests, papers and maps, library problems—in short, a laboratory system. Every student should always have at least one course in which he is held to rigid and exact performance. These courses should be required, no matter what the special field or period of history, and should form a sequence leading to a degree and providing training for a technical and professional career. In addition to these courses, designed to assure personal work and supervision, enough other, presumably lecture, courses should be required to secure a general knowledge of history. Beyond that there are always enough electives to satisfy any personal wish or whim of the student.
Topical method in European history
There is much to be said, especially in modern history, for the topical treatment of institutions. In a very specialized course a single institution may be treated; but even in a general course, treating the several human institutions as evolutionary organisms seems preferable and is more interesting than a chronological narrative, which grows more inane the more general the course. Courses which come to modern times can trace existing institutions and their immediate antecedents, thus giving an advantage that many instructors neglect from the mere tradition that history does not come down to living man. No primitive superstition needs to be dispelled more than this, if history is to maintain its hold in the modern college. Indeed, whenever possible—which is always with modern history—a course should start from the present by dwelling on the existing conditions the historical antecedents of which are to be traced. If this is done, the student forthwith secures a vital interest and feels that he is trying to understand his own rather than past times. After this preliminary the past can be traced chronologically or topically as preferred, the textbook serving as a quarry for data, the teacher seeing to it that the change or progress toward the present condition is perceived and understood, and furnishing corroborative and analogous materials from the history of other nations and periods.
Assigned reading
It is the general practice of college courses in history to require outside reading. Though this rests on the sound ground that the student ought to get a large background and learn to know books and writers, it is very doubtful whether this aim is, in fact, achieved. The student often has too much work to permit of much outside reading, and often the library is too limited to give him a good choice, or to permit him to keep a desirable book until he has finished reading it. Unguided reading is almost certainly a failure; reading guided only by putting a selected list of books before the student is not sure to be a success. The instructor ought from time to time to tell his class something about the books he suggests, and about their authors and their careers, viewpoints and merits, as a reader always profits by knowing these things. As the reading of snatches from collateral books is hardly profitable, so the perusal of longer histories is often impossible, and generally confines the student for a long time to the minutiæ of one period while the class is going forward. In view of these difficulties there is much to be said in favor of putting a large textbook into the hands of a class, and requiring a thorough reading and understanding of it, and correspondingly reducing outside readings. If collateral reading is demanded, it is a good plan to require students to read a biography or a work on some special institution falling within the scope of the course,—some selected historical novel even,—for in that way the student reads, as he will in later life, something he selects instead of a required number of pages, a specific thing is covered, an author’s acquaintance is made, and therefore a significant test can be conducted. Furthermore, as some students will buy special volumes of this kind, the pressure on the library is reduced. Direct access to reference shelves is always recommended. One of our universities has a system of renting preferred books to students.
Tests on outside reading
Tests on outside reading are always difficult, but they must be employed if the reading is not to become a farce. By having weekly reading reports on uniform cards, one can often arrange groups of students who have read the same thing and can therefore be tested by a single question. By extending this over several weeks the majority of students, even in a large class, can be tested with relatively few questions. Some instructors require students to hand in their reading notes, others check up the books the students use in the library, still others have consultation periods in which they inquire into the student’s reading. Quiz sections, if there are any, offer a good opportunity to test collateral reading.
Miscellaneous aids in teaching history
Map making, coördinated with the recitations and so designed as to require more than mere tracing, is desirable in introductory courses. The imaginative historical theme written by the student is employed—and successfully, it is declared—in one college. A syllabus is highly useful in the hands of students in lecture courses. It can be mimeographed at comparatively slight expense for each lecture, thus permitting changes in successive years—a distinct advantage over the printed syllabus.
The problem of suitable examination
How to give a fair and telling examination is the college teacher’s perennial problem. The less he teaches and insists on facts and details, the greater his quandary. A majority of students incline to parrot what they have heard, to the dismay of the teacher who wants them to make the subject their own. Hence tests calling the memory only into play do not satisfy the true teacher or the thoughtful student. At the least there should be some questions requiring constructive or synthetic thinking by the student. Above all, the instructor of introductory work should form a first-hand personal opinion of the student by requiring him to come to the office for consultation. Nothing can take the place of the personal touch. Quiz masters are better than no touch; but they are a poor substitute for the small class and direct contact, even if the instructor is not one of the masters of the profession.
The worth of topical or institutional treatment
The topical or institutional treatment of history has been mentioned above as being particularly applicable to modern history. If carefully worked out beforehand it can be made to embrace virtually everything—certainly everything significant—that is contained either in the text or in a chronological narrative. To be sure, a topical treatment of this kind places more emphasis on the common experiences of mankind than does national history, and, as some nations or peoples precede others in a given development, history becomes continuous instead of fragmentary. Perhaps, too, the way certain matters are introduced into “continuous” history may appear forced, unless it be remembered that this impression is created merely by its dissimilarity from the usual interpretation, which is just as arbitrary and forced until one gets accustomed to it.
Classification in topical treatment
It will be serviceable in arranging a topical treatment of any period of history, which shall show a sense of historical continuity and keep in mind the fundamental stimuli and causes of human action, to note that virtually all human interests can be classified under one of the following six heads: physical, economic, social, religious, political, and intellectual (or cultural). Though these are never wholly isolated and are always interactive, one or the other may be specially significant in a given era, and thus we speak of a religious age, an age of rationalism, or the period of the industrial revolution.
Suggested Topical Outline of Modern European History
To apply this more specifically to modern European history, there follows an outline of topics. It is general to about 1789, and more detailed for the period since that time (IV below), the endeavor being to show how a topical treatment of the development of democracy can be made to include practically everything of significance. There are certain cautions necessary here: that the outline is suggestive only, that it does not pretend or aim to be complete, that specific data often found in the sub-heads are to serve as illustrations and not as a complete statement of sub-topics; and that it is in fact merely a skeleton which can be extended and amplified indefinitely by insertions.
I. Background of the modern period.
A. Economic and social conditions at the close of the Middle Age.
B. Political nature of feudalism.
The governments of the 15th century.
C. The medieval church.
II. The development of religious liberty.
A. The Reformation.
B. Varieties of Protestant sects, from state churches to
individualistic sects.
C. The Religious Wars, and toleration.
III. Absolute monarchy.
A. Dynastic states.
B. Dynastic wars and the balance of power.
IV. The development of democracy.
A. The dynastic feudal state (Ancien Régime).
1. Description of the Ancien Régime.
2. Proponents of the Ancien Régime.
Dynasties (divine right monarchs).
Feudal landlords.
Higher clergy and state churches.
The army command (younger sons of the nobility).
The schools (education for privileged classes only).
B. The revolutionary elements.
1. The dissatisfied feudal serf.
2. The intellectuals, rationalists, political theorists.
The “social compact.”... Popular sovereignty.
3. Religious dissenters.
4. Industrial elements.
a. The Industrial Revolution.
Resulting in exportation, markets, and laissez-faire
doctrines.
b. The bourgeoisie (employers)... The Third Estate.
c. The proletariat... Unorganized labor elements.
C. The Revolutionary Period, 1789-1800.
1. Triumph of bourgeoisie over feudal aristocracy in France,
1789-1791. Limited monarchy. Mirabeau.
2. Increasing influence and rise to control of France of the
Parisian proletariat. The Republic... The Terror...
Robespierre.
3. Radiation of revolutionary ideas to other nations.
4. Wars between revolutionary France and monarchical
Europe.
The rise of Napoleon.
D. The decline of the revolutionary elements, 1800-1815.
1. France converted from a republic to an empire by
Napoleon.
2. The Napoleonic Wars.
a. Reveal Napoleon’s dynastic ambition.
b. Lead Europe to combine against him and to blame
democratic ideas for the sorrows of the time.
c. Result in the defeat of Napoleon and the triumph of
anti-democratic or reactionary elements.
E. The fruits of the principle of popular sovereignty during the
19th century (chronologically England and France lead the
other countries in most of these developments).39
1. Constitutions, embodying ever-increasing popular rights and
powers.
2. Extension of suffrage. Political parties and party politics.
3. The spirit of nationality.
Independence of Greece and Belgium.
Unification of Italy and Germany
National revivals in Poland, Bulgaria, Servia, Rumania,
Bohemia, Finland, Ireland, and elsewhere.
Pan-Germanism, Pan-Slavism, Imperial Federation.
4. Class consciousness and strife.
Feudal aristocratic class—leans toward absolute monarchy.
Bourgeoisie (employing capitalists)—leans toward limited
monarchies or republics.
Labor—leans toward socialism. (The other elements in the
society are slow in developing a group consciousness.)
5. Abolition of feudal forms and tenures.
Fight on great landlords. Encouragement of independent
farmers.
Emancipation and protection of peasants: France, 1789;
Prussia, 1808; Austria, 1848; Russia, 1861.
6. Social, socialistic, and humanitarian legislation.
Factory acts, minimum wage laws, industrial insurance, old
age insurance, labor exchanges, child labor laws, prison
reform acts, revision of penal codes, abolition of slavery
and slave trade, government control or ownership of
railways, telephones, telegraph, and mails.
7. Opposition to state or national churches.
Disestablishment agitations... Separation of church and
state.
8. Demand for free public schools to replace church or other
private schools. State lay schools in England...
Suppression of teaching orders in France... Kulturkampf
in Germany... Expulsion of Jesuits... Tendency toward
compulsory non-sectarian education.
9. Imperialism.
Industrial societies depend on imports, exports, and markets
as means of keeping labor employed and people
prosperous. This means export of capital, hence, plans for
colonies, closed doors, preferential markets, and demands
for the protection of citizens abroad and political stability
in backward areas.
Partition of Africa, Asia, and Near East.
10. Militarism.
Expansion and colonial acquisition by one country exclude
another, thus unsettling the balance of power. Therefore
rival nations depend on force and go in for military and
naval programs.
F. The conflict between reactionary and bourgeois interests,
1815-1848.
1. Reactionary elements in control—opposed to
democracy and revolutionary doctrines.
a. Restore Europe as nearly as possible on old lines at
Vienna, 1815.
Ignore liberal tendencies and national sentiments.
b. Seek to maintain status quo.
Metternich... Holy Alliance.
Carlsbad Decrees... Congresses of Troppau, Laibach,
Verona... Intervention in Naples, Piedmont, and Spain.
Proposal to restore Latin America to Monarchy.
Opposed by Great Britain in compliance with bourgeois
interests.
Monroe Doctrine.
c. Failed to prevent:
Greek revolution and independence (national movement).
Separation of Belgium from the Netherlands (national).
Revival of liberal demands in various quarters, producing
the revolution of 1830 in France and elsewhere.
2. The ascendancy of the bourgeoisie, 1830-1848.
a. Industrialism on the continent.
b. The bourgeois (capitalist employer) secures political
power to advance his interests.
Revolution of 1830.
Reform bill of 1832.
Legislation against labor organizations and for tariffs
favoring trade.
c. The development of organized labor and socialism.
Legislation hostile to labor. Chartism.
Labor in France, Germany, and Belgium.
Spread of socialist doctrines.
d. The Revolution of 1848.
Socialist republican state in France, 1848.
The winning of constitutions in Prussia, Austria, and
elsewhere—breach in the walls of reaction.
G. The broadening base of democracy, 1848-1914.
1. The organization of labor.
2. The spread of socialistic views and of class consciousness.
Karl Marx.
3. The resistance of the old aristocratic class and the
bourgeoisie, who gradually fuse to form the conservative
element in all nations.
Napoleon III restores the Empire in France.
In Austria and Prussia, Bismarck and Francis Joseph II
retrieve losses of 1848.
Disraeli and Conservatives in England.
4. The progress toward universal suffrage after 1865,
strengthening political position of lower classes.
Vindication of democratic government through triumph of the
North in the United States gave impetus to democracy
abroad.
Electoral reform bills in Great Britain, 1867, 1884, 1885.
Franco-Prussian War and the Third French Republic.
Universal suffrage.
Unification of Germany and universal suffrage.
Russian Revolution, 1917.
Woman suffrage.
5. Popular sovereignty and its consequences.
a. Triumph of republicans and radicals in France over
monarchists and clericals.
b. Liberal ministries in United Kingdom.
Lloyd George Budget... Parliament Act.
Social legislation.
c. Growth of Social Democratic party in Germany.
Bismarck and state socialism.
d. In recent times the many divergent political parties fall
rather instinctively into three groups which have opposing
views and policies on almost every question, and which
may be called:
Conservatives (Tories, aristocrats, monarchists,
Junkers, clericals, capitalists, imperialists, militarists);
peasants and farmers, being conservative, are usually
politically allied to this group.
Liberals (progressives, democrats, labor parties,
Socialists, social democrats, Dissenters,
anti-imperialists, anti-militarists).
Radicals, Bolsheviki or revolutionists seeking change of
the economic and social order.
6. Effects of the war
a. Extensive nationalization and socialization of industry and
human rights in all belligerent countries.
b. Develops into a “war for democracy,” and for moral as
opposed to materialistic aims.
c. Culminates in an attempt to secure a righteous and
lasting peace through the instrumentality of a league of
nations.
Edward Krehbiel
Leland Stanford Junior University
Bibliography
Texts
Andrews, C. M. Historical Development of Modern Europe. Two vols. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1900.
Hayes, Carlton J. H. A Political and Social History of Modern Europe. Two vols. The Macmillan Company, 1916.
Robinson, J. H., and Beard, C. A. The Development of Modern Europe. Two vols. Ginn and Co., 1907, 1908.
Schevill, Ferdinand. A Political History of Modern Europe. Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1907.
Period Histories
Bourne, Henry Eldredge. The Revolutionary Period in Europe. The Century Company, 1914.
Cambridge Modern History. Thirteen vols. and maps. I. the Renaissance; II. The Reformation; III. The Wars of Religion; IV. The Thirty Years’ War; V. The Age of Louis XIV; VI. The Eighteenth Century; VII. The United States; VIII. The French Revolution; IX. Napoleon; X. The Restoration; XI. The Growth of Nationalities; XII. The Latest Age; XIII. Genealogical Tables and Lists and General Index; also on atlas, in another volume. Cambridge, the University Press, 1902-1912.
Hazen, Charles Downer. Europe since 1815. Henry Holt & Co., 1910.
Lindsay, T. M. A History of the Reformation. Two vols. Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1906-1907.
Lowell, E. J. The Eve of the French Revolution.
Schapiro, Jacob Salwyn. Modern and Contemporary European History. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1918.
Wakeman, H. O. The Ascendancy of France. The Macmillan Company, 1894.
Source Books
Anderson, Frank Maloy. The Constitutions and Other Select Documents Illustrative of the History of France, 1789-1901. H. W. Wilson Company, Minneapolis, 1904.
Fling, Fred Morrow. Source Problems of the French Revolution. Harper and Brothers, 1913.
Robinson, J. H. Readings in European History. Two vols. Ginn and Co., 1904.
—— Readings in European History. Abridged Edition. Ginn and Co., 1906.
Robinson, J. H., and Beard, C. A. Readings in Modern European History. Two vols. Ginn and Co., 1908.
—— Readings in Modern European History. Abridged Edition. Ginn and Co., 1909.
Atlases
Cambridge Modern History. Volume of Maps. Cambridge, the University Press, 1912.
Dow, Earle W. Atlas of European History. Henry Holt & Co., 1909.
Droysen, Gustav. Allgemeiner historischer Kandatlas. Velhagen und Klasing, Leipzig, 1886.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson. A School Atlas of English History. Longmans, Green & Co., 1910.
Poole, Reginald Lane. Historical Atlas of Modern Europe from the Decline of the Roman Empire. H. Frowde, 1896-1902.
Putzger, Friedrich Wilhelm. Historischer Schul-atlas zur alten, mittleren, und neunen Geschichte. Velhagen und Klasing, Leipzig, 1910.
Shepherd, William Robert. Historical Atlas. Henry Holt & Co., 1911.
Bibliographical
Adams, Charles Kendall. A Manual of Historical Literature. Harper and Brothers, 1888.
Andrews, Gambrill, and Tall. A Bibliography of History for Schools and Libraries. Longmans, Green & Co., 1911.
Pedagogical
Committee of Seven. American Historical Association. The Study of History in the Schools. The Macmillan Company, 1899.
Committee of Five. American Historical Association. The Study of History in the Secondary Schools. The Macmillan Company, 1911.
Dunn, Arthur William. The Social Studies in Secondary Education. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education, Bulletin No. 28, 1916.
Johnson, H. The Teaching of History in Elementary and Secondary Schools. 1915.
Robinson, James Harvey. The New History; Essays Illustrating the Modern History Outlook. The Macmillan Company, 1912.
Historical Fiction
Baker, E. A. History in Fiction. Two vols. E. P. Dutton & Co., 1907.
Nield, Jonathan. A Guide to the Best Historical Novels and Tales. G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Periodicals
The American Historical Review. Published by the American Historical Association, Washington, D. C.
The History Teacher’s Magazine. McKinley Publishing Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Footnotes
39 This summary of the consequences of the doctrines of democracy is allowed to break into the topical development of the outline, as it gives a sort of general introduction to tendencies since 1815. It will not escape the teacher that he could treat history since 1815 by taking up in order the topics given under this heading.