lists of names, because in these various ways they received sufficient drill. Basedow also emphasized the relation of human activities to geographical surroundings. He put an anthropological impulse into geography which later through Ritter, Guyot, and others has become so important in all geographical instruction and research.

Salzman, the most important follower of Basedow strongly condemned the study of distant countries before the pupil could think clearly in the terms of the geographical factors in his neighborhood. Otherwise the instruction has no foundation and may be worse than nothing.

"The prattling of a child, who has no clear idea of the natural and political conditions of his province, about the Carpathian Mountains or the forms of government in France or China, is nothing more than the babbling of a goat, or even worse, for the goat scarcely thinks of anything, while the child is thinking something wholly false." (51-38.)

Pestalozzi founded his teaching of geography on the ideas expressed by Rousseau. Like Basedow he tried to teach together geography and the study of nature. His principle, that all knowledge is based on observation, led him to emphasize home geography. He was the first progressively to teach children home geography by excursions. He thought that experience from self-activity in a limited field is necessary to comprehend the more distant parts of the earth. (51-157.)

In practice, however, Pestalozzi's method was often much like that of Francke. He spoke the names of cities, rivers, countries, etc., in series to his pupils, who repeated them in chorus. In this way, like Locke, he wished the child to learn these facts at an early age before seeking in each name all its relations. He considered this work only a kind of preparation and began the real study of geography by taking the pupils to different places in the valley at Yverdun, and finally having them reproduce the valley in clay.

Pestalozzi, however imperfect his methods in practice, was in geography as in other subjects the great inspirer. Besides many others it is of special note that he was directly the inspirer of Froebel and of Ritter. Both visited Pestalozzi at Yverdun. Froebel returned to apply his principles to his own classes at Frankfurt, bringing geography into the life interests of his pupils, making it a real educational force, intellectually and morally, and receiving from his experience a fund of ideas which formed the basis and the inspiration of all his later teachings on methods. Ritter learned Pestalozzi's method and promised to apply it to geography. The result was his "Comparative Geography," which may be said to have founded a new science, changing geography from a chaos of facts to an organized whole, giving it life and purpose.

Ritter said of Pestalozzi at Yverdun: "I have watched the growth of this precious plant. I have even drunk of the waters and breathed the air that give it life. I have learned to understand this 'method,' which, based on the nature of the child, develops so naturally and so freely. It is for me now to apply it to the domain of geography, where nature has been too long neglected. I left Yverdun fully determined to keep my promise I made to Pestalozzi of introducing his method into the study of geography, and already I am reducing chaos to order."

"Pestalozzi knew less geography than a child in one of our primary schools, yet it was from him that I gained my chief knowledge of this science, for it was in listening to him that I first conceived the idea of a natural method. It was he who opened the way to me, and I take pleasure in attributing to him whatever value my work may possess.” (39a,-263.)

Froebel, writing of his teaching geography at Frankfurt, after visiting Pestalozzi, said: "I turned these occasions [of excursions once a week] to profit by leading on my boys to think for themselves: and to apprehend the relations of the various parts of the earth's surface. On these and other perceptions gained in this way, I based my instruction in physiography, making them my points of departure.

"The town was first my starting point and my centre. From this I extended out observations to the right and to the left, on this side and on that. I took the river Main as a base line just as it lay; or I used a line of hills or the distant mountains. I settled firmly the four quarters of the compass. In everything I followed the lead of nature herself, and with the data so obtained I worked out a representation of the place from direct observation, and on a reduced scale in some level spot of ground, as a sandy tract carefully chosen for the purpose. When my representation, or map, was thoroughly understood and well impressed on every one's mind, then we reconstructed it in school on the blackboard placed horizontally.

"This map was first sketched by pupils and teacher together, and then each pupil had to do it by himself as an exercise. . . . . My boys were as well acquainted with their surroundings of the town as with their own rooms at home, and gave rapid and striking answers as to all the natural peculiarities of the neighborhood.

"This course was the fountain head of all the teaching methods, which I afterwards thoroughly worked out and have now been in use many years." (45a,-55, 60.)

Two other writers and teachers of this time, Frederick Gedike, principal of a gymnasium in Berlin, and Johann G. Herder, of the Weimar gymnasium, did much to improve the teaching of geography. Gedike's main service was to adapt the teaching of geography to the age of the child. He argued against the logical order and directed the teacher to follow the order of nature as related to the developing mind of the child.

Herder thought the study of geography one of the most important for useful knowledge as well as for culture and elevation of soul. He insisted that the subject is full of life. He said "Talk of geography being dry! You might as well talk of the ocean's being dry."

He held that geography and natural history are inseparable, and that natural history may be the most useful kind of geog

raphy. He was one of the first to consider the child's natural interests as important in instruction in geography. By means of the facts naturally interesting to the child he aimed to impress the chief characteristics of each country or climatic division. (51-47.)

"The elephant and the tiger, the crocodile and the walrus interest the child far more than the eight electors of the holy Roman empire in their ermine bonnets and coats. Through natural history each land, sea, island, climate, race, continent, is shown to him in indelible characters, the more so because these characters are unchanging and not connected with the name of some dead administrator.

"The Egyptian horse, the Arabian camel, the Indian elephant, the African lion, the American bison, etc., are more memorable symbols of a country than all the variable boundaries, which some delusive peace draws and the first war perhaps changes." (51-57, 58.)

In his first class in geography Herder confined the study to the important animals, plants, other important products, and the customs of the people in the different continents. In the second year this was continued with some reference to political geography and especially the geography of Germany.

Home geography was worked out to its present completeness by Finger, Matzat, and Diesterweg. They considered the study of geographical phenomena in the home district as psychologically necessary for map reading and the correct formation of ideas of distant places. It makes geographical description more real, vivid, and intelligible. Matzat thought the reading of maps of most importance in all geographical instruction. Diesterweg had great influence in Germany upon the development of present methods. He proved the value of home geography and popularized it. In him culminated that emphasis on beginning geographical instruction by observation of local features. (51-160.)

The 18th century was a time of wide observation, exploration, and the collecting of vast masses of facts belonging to many sciences. In this growth no other branch of learning had become as enriched as geography. The facts were, however, unrelated and uncorrelated. In 1765 Immanuel Kant first systematized geography. Blumenbach, in 1775, laid the foundation of anthropo-geography, emphasized later by Ritter, and more recently by Ratzel and others. Zimmerman, in 1778, established the outlines of zoo-geography. Humboldt, in 1805, wrote his plant geography, prepared the first vertical profiles, introduced the comparative study of elevations, established isotherms and heat zones, and in his Cosmos arranged facts according to their scientific relations. Ritter, inspired by Pestalozzi and profiting by the work of Humboldt, wrote his Erdkunde and his Comparative Geography. (51-160, 3; 58a; 89a22; 18-No. I, No. 2.) In the preface to his volume on Europe he

wrote, in 1804, "From this desolate heap of particles an organic, life-like whole must be developed, which corresponds to reality; from the tedious because thoughtless description of the earth must arise a knowledge of the earth; i. e., a science which investigates causal connections and enlivens intellect and imagination. Geography must virtually become a science." Ritter's ideas were followed out by many educators and geographers, among whom especially Peschel, in Germany, emphasized comparative geography and physical geography, and Guyot, in America, gave new methods and new life to the teaching of geography in this country. (52-16.)

Since the days of Humboldt, Ritter, Guyot, and Peschel a most potent idea has taken hold on the scientific world, acting as a great unifying force; viz., the evolution theory. The development of the earth from particles in space to the cooling sphere, of the forms of relief upon its surface, and of the multitudes of forms of life, all struggling towards higher and higher forms of perfection culminating in man, has given to geography a scope, a scientific completeness, and a philosophical dignity which it never before possessed. It reversed the idea of Ritter that God had especially created the environment of man in every detail to fit his needs, and that one of the great purposes of geography was to point out how well God had done his work. The evolution theory has substituted for teleological explanation that of morphology of form, of response to the influence of environment. It has led to the perfection of the scientific method, which looks backward to the causes and successively forward to the results of the facts under investigation.

This method has now been generally adopted in the courses of study, the statements of methods, in text-books, and in teaching geography generally in the various grades of school. It is no doubt the proper method to use at certain stages of the work, but it has gradually been pushed down into the grades until we now have eight-year-old children being required to infer from the action of a little stream actually observed or seen only in pictures, the destruction of mountains, the formation of peneplains, and the consequent effects upon the inhabtants thereof. It requires a child to think and reason in terms of adult reason, when he has neither the materials nor the power to reason. It is a kind of reasoning into which we can well afford to wait for the child to grow. The development of the child, as in the development of the race, and the very nature of the scientific method require that it be used only after the accumulation of a good body of facts. The histories of our natural sciences show this. The results of modern childstudy also show that the child in these first years of school life

is in an accumulating rather than a reasoning stage. Our scientific geographers to-day err as much in trying to make the first work in their subject with little children scientific as did those teachers two hundred and less years ago who insisted on following from the first the logical development of the subject.

Two other methods of importance deserve mention; viz., the topical method and the method by types. Ziller, one of the followers of Herbart, developed the topical method because of its correlating value, and also because it requires greater preparation on the part of the teacher, secures greater interest, and stimulates the self-activity of the pupil. This method is now in common use. It has aided greatly to give instruction in this subject more unity. The method by types is an extension of the topical method. It tries to group geographical facts about the study of a few type forms, which may serve as keys to the whole. (69.) This is a valuable method. It admits of wide application and is being satisfactorily used. The wide, intelligent application of a type form as a means of explanation, however, requires a good knowledge of the regions to be explained as well as of the type itself, so that this method seems best adapted only to the later stages of geographical study.

Besides these general methods many devices have been used to enliven the long lists of dry facts to be memorized. Geographical games, dissected maps, and play maps have been much used in Europe. Some writers have tried to make their books interesting by introducing rhymes, songs, or humorous outline maps for drawing, suggestive of the maps of various countries.

Summary.

1. We find that from the first historical records of the teaching of geography, except during the dark ages, observation has been considered fundamental. It was emphasized by Strabo, and again by Bacon, Comenius, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, and all important teachers of geography during the past century. It is to-day recognized to be psychologically and pedagogically fundamental.

2. Emphasis upon observation and sense perception led Comenius first, and later Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Ritter, Diesterweg, and others to make the knowledge of geographical facts within the direct observation and experience of the pupil the basis of all geographical instruction, and to demand this as a psychological necessity for the right understanding of phenomena more distant. This method of beginning with the geography of the home is now generally universally recognized, although very little practiced.

Representation is of the greatest value in teaching geography. Map sketching arose in Greece before text-books were