himself for teaching, he continued in the school for a year as assistant teacher. Thus he became thoroughly imbued with its methods. He was especially interested in geography, and Guts Muths early prophesied he would become a famous geographer. The instruction at Schnepfenthal included much physical training, school gardening, and especially organized excursions for geographical and social study. Ritter remained in touch with this school all his life, and always took council with "Father Salzmann" whenever he needed advice.

Ritter met Pestalozzi at Yverdon; congenial spirits. In 1807, while traveling in Switzerland with two boys whose tutor he was, Ritter spent a week at Yverdon. He was greatly attracted by Pestalozzi's personality and labors, and was thoroughly prepared by his Schnepfenthal training to appreciate what he saw. In 1809 he repeated his visit and wrote to a friend expressing his profound appreciation of the influence upon him of Pestalozzi's views. Shortly after this journey he set to work on a manual of physical geography, of which he wrote:

My first object in undertaking this work was to fulfill a promise made to Pestalozzi, that I would prepare a treatise, in his method, on geography. I did, in fact, begin it with this in view, but I soon found that the materials were in a confused and hopeless state, and that no method had ever been applied to this science. Proceeding in my task the chaos gradually disappeared. . . . I have found every mountain pass used as a means of transit, every waterfall and every promontory the scene of human settlement — every physical feature, in a word, invested with historical significance. I believe that I can see in this the basis of a science of physical geography which shall show that history has written its records in the language of external nature; that in the world around us exist the causes which have controlled the progress of the race. (11: 99.)

At other times Ritter referred to the influence of Pestalozzi, particularly in the commonly quoted statement in which Ritter said that he learned how to teach geography from Pestalozzi although the latter knew no geography. Finally,

when the first volume of his great life work was issued in 1817, it was dedicated to Pestalozzi and Guts Muths, his "fatherly teachers and dear friends."

Pestalozzi's influence only one factor in Ritter's development. When Ritter first met Pestalozzi the former had no clear notion of ever becoming a great professional geographer. He was primarily interested in pedagogy, and his ambition was to be the head of a great boys' school. Hence his enthusiasm for and debt to Pestalozzi were largely pedagogical and personal, not scientific. While we must give Pestalozzi credit for influencing Ritter, we must keep in mind that the latter was already thoroughly familiar with the essentials of Pestalozzi's methods as they had been practiced by his predecessors at Schnepfenthal. Ritter's scientific achievements were due to his own genius, his vast erudition, and the individual researches of such men as Humboldt, which made possible the great work of scientific organization which Ritter carried out.

Home geography as taught by Pestalozzi and Ritter.-In another place (see p. 200) we quoted the very clear directions given by Rousseau for the study of home geography. In the early part of this chapter Pestalozzi's method as described by one of the pupils at Yverdon (1805) was presented. Ritter advocated the same method and indicated its large possibilities even for mature students in the following statement :

Personal investigation must be made by every student in order to understand the results of the investigations of others. Wherever our home is, there lie all the materials which we need for the study of the entire globe. Humboldt hints at this when he says in his "Kosmos,” Every little nook and shaded corner is but a reflection of the whole nature.” The roaring mountain brook is the type of the thundering cataract; the geological formations of a single little island suggest the broken coast lines of a continent; . . . The digging of every well may contribute to our knowledge of the earth's crust; the excavations made in the buildings of railroads may, without the loss of time, labor or expense, be a ceaseless source of instruction. In the structure of a spear of grass, of a rush, of a single monocotyledon, may be studied in

miniature the palm tree, prince of the tropics. . . . Whoever has wandered through the valleys and woods, and over the hills and mountains of his own State, will be the one capable of following Herodotus in his wanderings over the globe. . . . The very first step in a knowledge of geography is to know thoroughly the district where we live. (12: xxv.)

Pestalozzian-Ritter geography in the United States. The largest influence of the Pestalozzian-Ritter geography on the teaching of the subject in the United States has been in the development of home geography in the lower grades. The general principles of the organization of subject matter for upper-grade work have been followed in some places. There is some evidence of minor importance in connection with the work of William C. Woodbridge, Horace Mann, and others who were familiar with European practices, which indicates that the new methods of teaching geography were becoming known in the United States during the first half of the nineteenth century. There are, however, two such prominent leaders in popularizing these methods at a later date, namely Professor Arnold Guyot and Colonel F. W. Parker, that we will devote the rest of the discussion to their work. Guyot expounded the new methods and wrote texts, 1866. - Arnold Guyot (1807-1884), a native of Switzerland, studied four years under Ritter and came to Massachusetts in 1848. Ritter's biographer, Gage, said in 1866:

I suppose that without controversy among those who are competent to decide, the most successful and at the same time the most distinguished successor of Ritter in the field of geography is Professor Arnold Guyot.

From 1848 to 1854 Guyot was employed by the Massachusetts Board of Education as an inspector and institute lecturer. Concerning this work he wrote:

During more than nine years it was my privilege to address thousands of teachers in the normal schools of Massachusetts and New Jersey, and in the teachers' institutes, on the subject of geographical teaching and the reform so much needed in that important department of instruction.

In 1854 Guyot was made professor of geology and physical geography at Princeton. His relation to the teaching of elementary geography consisted in his institute lectures mentioned above, and in the preparation of maps, of a series of textbooks, and of a manual on "Geographical Teaching,' all issued about 1866. Speaking of these books in 1882, Colonel F. W. Parker said:

Guyot, the pupil and disciple of Ritter, made for us his unequaled Common School Geography. But the book has been a failure and is now out of print, because teachers who have been taught in the old way could not comprehend its great beauty. (20: 125.)

Guyot's model book for home, type, and regional geography. Although the books were not a financial success, they were better than many of the geographies used at the present time. In preparing the first book of the series Guyot secured the assistance of a woman who had been very successful in teaching geography according to Pestalozzian methods in the Oswego Normal School. Thus the book represented the combined labors of the leading scientist and of a successful teacher of little children. Admirable sample oral lessons on home geography, including first steps in making maps of local regions, were presented in the manual. Among the aims of the first book of the series the following is stated as the first : "To fill the mind of the young with vivid pictures of nature in such regions of the globe as may be considered great geographical types.'

F. W. Parker stimulated interest in Ritter-Guyot methods, 1889; Frye geographies. - The second great influence in improving geography teaching in the United States along Pestalozzian-Ritter lines was the work of Colonel F. W. Parker (1837-1902), who will be discussed at greater length in a later chapter. Colonel Parker's influence was exerted in much the same way as Guyot's, only more effectively, namely, in the training of teachers and through the publication, in 1889, of a book entitled "How to teach Geography." The

character of the book is clearly indicated in the statement describing it in the International Education Series, of which it is Volume X, to wit: "A practical exposition of methods and devices in teaching geography which apply the principles and plans of Ritter and Guyot." It is not necessary to describe this book, as it is to be found in most libraries, and a rapid glance through it will show its relation to the movement under discussion.

Colonel Parker was influenced not only by the books of Guyot and Ritter, but also by Kiepert (1818-1899), who occupied Ritter's chair at the University of Berlin, where Parker studied for two years beginning in 1872. Some of the most prominent teachers of geography at the present time were trained under Colonel Parker at the Cook County (Illinois) Normal School (1883-1896), where he used the texts of Ritter and Guyot. The best known of these disciples of Parker is Alexis Frye (1859-) whose "Geography" published in 1895 embodies many of the Ritter principles. The Redway and Hinman "Natural Geographies" published in 1898 are a part of the same tradition.

Connected development of geography teaching from Rousseau to Colonel Parker. The development of the teaching of geography has been described at such great length because it exhibits, more clearly perhaps than any other subject, the connection between the following factors: (1) the epoch-making influence of Rousseau; (2) the two practical lines of experimentation initiated by his publications, namely, the schools of Basedow and of Pestalozzi; (3) the larger social development of subject matter, that is, the science of geography; (4) the importation of the European theories and practices into the United States; and (5) the acknowledged imitation of these in very recent reforms. From Rousseau to Colonel Parker we have a definitely established and connected line of historical development in the teaching of geography.