Early Quaker education in Pennsylvania

by Thomas Woody

THE CURRICULUM

The curricula are in general in harmony with the recommendations of the yearly meetings; and the Frame of Government

If we go back to our references on the advices of the yearly meetings of London and Philadelphia we shall find there the basic reasons for the subjects which are to be mentioned as taught regularly in the schools. We recall that there was an emphasis placed on the moral, the useful and practical, and the subjects first to be mentioned were: writing, reading, and arithmetic, which constituted the necessities.[873] Furthermore, the Frame of Government of 1696, the product of Quaker minds and hands, recommended to erect and order all public houses and encourage and reward the authors of useful sciences and laudable inventions.[874] It is seen also from later advices of the yearly meeting that the useful was not limited necessarily to the four R’s, religion, arithmetic, writing, and reading. In 1737, they recommended that as opportunity could be found, children should be permitted to learn “French, High and Low Dutch, Danish, etc.”[875] The use of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew is also justified by Crouch,[876] and it is well known and evident in all their writings that Penn, Barclay, Fothergill, Lloyd, Proud, Pastorius, and innumerable others were classically educated men.

Studies pursued in Flower’s school

In Benezet’s

Walby’s

Seaton’s

Girls’ School

Godfrey’s

The curriculum of the first school (Enoch Flower’s) consisted of reading, writing, and casting accounts,[877] and it seems entirely probable that these were the chief constituents, along with moral instruction, for many years, in all save the Latin School. At any rate there occur no disproving factors in that early period. In 1742, when Anthony Benezet came from the Germantown school to Philadelphia, he was employed to teach arithmetic, writing, accounts, and French.[878] John Walby, employed about ten years before him (Benezet) was to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic.[879] Alexander Seaton was employed in 1751 to teach a school “in the upper part of the City,” the subjects being writing, arithmetic, and parts of the mathematics.[880] In 1754, when Benezet first began in the Girls’ School (mornings), he was required to instruct in reading, writing, arithmetic, and English grammar.[881] Then, besides what we may term the English School, in which Seaton and Benezet taught for some time, there were others which we might term “petty schools,” for example, one kept by Debby Godfrey,[882] who taught some poor children to learn to sew and read, and another, taught by Ann Redman (1761), previously occupied by Rebeckah Burchall, where were taught reading, writing, and plain sewing.[883]

Letter writing

Since writing letters was an art much used and cultivated in the Colonial Period, and writing was greatly emphasized in the schools, it may be of interest to insert a letter written by a school boy in 1735. The letter is written in a fairly regular boyish hand, and is probably the production of a youngster about 12 years of age.

Nov. 21, 1735.

Dear Uncle,

I think in duty, I ought to wait on you with my first letter, which I hope will plead excuse for all faults. I remember what you told me, and write or go to school every day—I am much obliged to you for your kind present of tickets, and hope I shall have good success.—Pray give my duty to Uncle and Aunt Penn and all my Cousins. My love to Mr. Philaps, Mr. Jervice and Farmer Dill. With all my Friends.—So conclude.

Dear Uncle
Your Affct. Nep.

Thomas Freame.[884]

Phil. d. Novbr. 21, 1735.

Curriculum of later dates

Spelling

Quaker school curricula compared with others

At later dates than those above mentioned the records of the overseers, reports made in the monthly meetings of Philadelphia, Horsham School Minutes, Darby, and others, indicate that the curriculum consisted of reading, English, writing, arithmetic, branches of the mathematics, sewing, spelling, needlework, and other things suitable for girls.[885] The only one which is mentioned at this latter date, and not at the former, is spelling. This of course does not mean, necessarily, that spelling had just been introduced. In 1756 the visiting committee reported that spelling books and Bibles were needed in the schools for the poor children,[886] and since Benezet’s spelling book came to a second edition in 1779,[887] and Fox’s Instructions for Right Spelling was published in Philadelphia in 1702,[888] we may be certain that spelling as a regular study began at a very early date. If we compare this curriculum with those mentioned by private tutors at the same time, we find them essentially the same. There was, however, frequent mention of such subjects as navigation, calk guaging, mensuration, bookkeeping,[889] surveying,[890] dialling,[891] astronomy, and fortification,[892] which are not mentioned definitely in the curriculum of the Friends’ schools. It is quite probable that those above, dealing with higher mathematics, were included in the higher mathematics taught in the Classical School. But one cannot imagine that “fortification” was granted a place. Those studies of the mathematics may be mentioned again in studying the curriculum of the Latin School.

Studies pursued in the Negro School

The curriculum in the Negro School (1770) consisted approximately of the same subjects, though they may have been modified to some extent in presentation, and restricted more or less to the rudiments. The subjects of instruction mentioned when the school first began were reading, writing, and arithmetic, and were to be taught under “prudent” and “competent” direction.[893]

What books were used for the instruction in this curriculum of the English and Lower schools? We cannot state absolutely in the case of all studies, but we can judge with comparative certainty what books were most available for their use.

Books prominent for religious instruction in the schools

Bible

Apology of Barclay, and Penn’s Reflections, Maxims, and Advice to His Children

In the case of those used for religious instruction, the meeting records usually mentioned the name, which enables one to state with absolute certainty that certain books were used. Bibles for the use of schools were requested by the visiting committees of the overseers in Philadelphia, for the use of poor scholars.[894] Other books of religious and denominational character such as Penn’s Reflections, Maxims, and Advice to His Children, are mentioned definitely by Darby,[895] Horsham School Committee,[896] Sadsbury,[897] and Byberry Preparative meetings[898] as being received for use in connection with the schools. Byberry Preparative,[899] Radnor[900] and Sadsbury[901] monthly meetings mention further the receipt of Barclay’s Apologies for school use. Besides these, which were undoubtedly used for school instruction, there was a long list of journals, essays, letters, epistles, histories of Friends, etc., which always were in the possession of each meeting and may have been used indirectly at least. They will be mentioned more at length in pages following.

Books probably used in spelling

The spelling book prepared by Fox and published in Philadelphia in 1702,[902] must have claimed a place in the Friends’ schools, though the books are nowhere mentioned by name. The title of this book includes reading, writing, spelling, and other things useful and necessary, and may easily have served for other purposes than use in spelling instruction. Other spellers, which became available from time to time, were Benezet’s Pennsylvania Spelling Book and The Alphabet printed by Henry Miller, 1770.[903] Among those which were used later in the century, Prowell, in speaking of the schools in York County, notes Comly’s, Cobb’s, and Webster’s.[904] From this array, which is no doubt incomplete, we may judge the schools were well supplied.

Primers likely to be used

Of the primers available, and likely to be used, there were a host. The first which should be mentioned was that published by Fox in 1659; it is not known whether this primer was used in Philadelphia. It seems that it was not printed there.[905] In 1677-8, the monthly meeting authorized the purchase of “primmers,”[906] however, and the choice must have been either Fox’s or Pastorius’. No student of early printing in Philadelphia has yet been able to determine when the latter’s was published. Hildeburn is in doubt,[907] while Smith thinks the “primmers” ordered by the meeting 1697-8 must have been those of Pastorius.[908] The minute, however, does not state which. In 1696 Pastorius indicated his willingness to take charge of a printing press for Friends,[909] but, since it had to be brought from England, it is not likely, though possible, that he himself could have printed the book, before the time of the “primmer” purchase was mentioned. Since Pastorius lists a Fox’s Primmer among the books in his possession,[910] that book must have been known in the monthly meeting too, and may have been the one used.[911] The data are inadequate and uncertain for reaching a decision in the matter.

Other primers available for use during the century

Other primers published and available in Philadelphia and which may well have gotten into Friends’ schools were Franklin’s, 1764; The New England Primmer Improved, 1770; The Newest American Primer, 1779; The New England Primmer Improved, 1779; and A Primmer, 1779.[912] The minutes of the meetings give little guidance as to which were or were not used. We know only they had this list (and perhaps more) from which to select. Still other books which were probably used in the English work were Dilworth’s A New Guide to the English Tongue and The Child’s New Plaything or Best Amusement, intended to make the Learning to Read a Diversion instead of a Task, both of which were published in 1757.[913]

In the writing schools

Quality of some samples noted

For use in the writing school, we find one definite reference made to Bickam’s Universal Penman, which was purchased for use in Alexander Seaton’s School in 1762.[914] The various primers and spellers already mentioned dealt largely with writing also, giving models which were to be set before the pupil in the books or to be written out for him by the master. Some of the mottoes called to mind were: “Command you may your mind from Play” and “A man of words and not of deeds, is like a garden full of weeds.”[915] The first exercises in writing were the making of elements such as straight lines, curves, and then single letters, and words. The various samples which the writer has noticed in the boy’s letter quoted,[916] and the student manuscript papers,[917] were of very good quality, the median grade of them being about “eleven” on the Thorndike Handwriting Scale.[918]

Arithmetics used in some of the schools

Ms. collection indicates the nature of the arithmetic work

Various arithmetics may be mentioned. There were Gough’s A Treatise of Arithmetic, Theory, etc., 1770, and Practical Arithmetic, 1767, neither of which appears to have been published in Philadelphia, but may have been better recommended than others, since gotten up by a Friend. Dilworth’s Schoolmaster’s Assistant published in Philadelphia, 1773,[919] was no doubt a close competitor with Pike’s, Park’s, and Daboll’s arithmetics, which Prowell mentions as being common in the latter part of the century.[920] He also describes a book gotten up by Elihu Underwood, schoolmaster at Warrington, in which he copied very orderly all the exercises of the arithmetic.[921] The Norris Collection likewise contains a few pupils’ copy books filled with neatly arranged exercises in addition, multiplication, division, both decimal and vulgar fractions, and another one which would correspond to our present-day commercial arithmetic, but which Isaac Norris probably called his merchants’ accounts.[922] The books vary in dates from 1729 to 1779.

Classical school curriculum

The curriculum of the classical school is best indicated by statements made on employing teachers for that place, which, though they indicate the subjects, do not state what materials were used for study. Whether the materials used in the study of the Greek and Latin tongues included the so-called “profane authors” is a matter for speculation. Robert Willian in 1748 was brought from England to teach Latin and Greek and other parts of learning.[923] The “other parts” may have included some English grammar, writing, and mathematics, as these are frequently mentioned elsewhere as being a part of the Latin school course.[924] Several masters employed from time to time for instruction in these subjects were (after Willian): Alexander Buller,[925] writing, mathematics, and the Latin tongue; John Wilson, as usher[926] to the master in the same school, and later as master;[927] King;[928] William Johnson;[929] Charles Thompson;[930] and Robert Proud.[931] Others might be named, all of whom seem to have been employed for teaching substantially the same curriculum. Arithmetic and reading are at times mentioned as being taught in the Latin school, usually by the ushers.[932]

Curriculum in the English school

The curriculum of what was known as the English School overlapped in some respects that of the Latin. Among the subjects usually taught there may be mentioned: arithmetic, writing, accounts, French,[933] reading,[934] and probably some mathematics.[935] The Girls School’s curriculum, taught by Benezet in 1754, consisted of reading, writing, arithmetic, and English grammar.[936]

Methods used in language instruction

Latin to be used in school as much as possible; Scriptures, Penn, and Barclay required

Some light is cast on the method of instruction in the English and Latin schools by instructions given by the Board for the use of the master. Latin scholars were to be accustomed to analyze and parse their several lessons; and the English scholars to learn it grammatically. Moreover the double translation method for Latin and Greek was required for instruction in those subjects; and practice in handwriting and spelling.[937] The reader is also referred to page [183] to the rules of Robert Proud, in which he states that Latin, as far as the pupils are able, must be used in the school. The reading of the Scriptures was required three times a week,[938] and in later rules (1795), they name also the works of Penn and Barclay as being required. They are placed in the same category with the Scriptures.[939]

Grammar used; others that were available

French grammars

School books possessed by Daniel Pastorius

Of the grammars used we made reference previously to that of Rudiman,[940] which was published in Philadelphia in 1776.[941] This was the first American edition. Another, Davy’s Adminiculum Puerile,[942] or a help for school boys, containing fundamental exercises for beginners, syntax, cautions for mistakes, English for Latin verses, and so forth, which was made easily available by a Philadelphia reprint in 1758, may have been in use. We might expect to find that some of the worthy masters, Pastorius, Willian, Thompson, Wilson, Proud, and others made some contribution in the way of Latin text-books; we are, in that respect, disappointed. Another grammar, but of the English tongue, was that prepared by James and John Gough, which, after being duly inspected by the Board, was adopted for use in the English School in 1761.[943] Since English grammar was also taught in the Latin School, it may have been used in that department also. Concerning the French book or grammar which Anthony Benezet may have used when he was engaged to teach that subject in 1742,[944] we cannot state definitely. However, there was a French School Book published in Philadelphia in 1730,[945] and it may safely be assumed to have been available for his use. The character of the book we do not know. Perrin’s Grammar of the French Tongue was printed in Philadelphia, 1779,[946] and was no doubt the best book available for use of the schools at and subsequent to that time. It may be well to mention here some school books which were in the possession of Daniel Pastorius; their presence may indicate that they, or a part of them, were used in the school. They were: Education, The Young Clerk’s Tutor, Elements of Geometry, A Short Introduction to Grammar, The English School Master, G. Fox’s Primmer, and Teacher’s Instruction for Children.[947]

Mathematics

Some idea of the extent to which mathematics was taught may be gained from certain old exercise books. Some of those, which doubtless belong to the lower schools, dealt with arithmetical exercises, with whole numbers, vulgar and decimal fractions, and commercial arithmetic.[948] Others, clearly more advanced, and doubtless belonging to the Latin school, though some were taught in the English, are chiefly filled with theorems and proven solutions in geometry, trigonometry, conic sections, and spherical trigonometry.[949] This compares quite favorably with the courses suggested in the newspapers, as we have already mentioned.