79. Taxation in England.

  1. How Pitt’s friendship for America offended George III.
  2. The representation of the English people in Parliament.
  3. How the representation of the people is kept fair in the United States.
  4. How it became unfair in England.
  5. Corrupt practices favored by this unfairness.
  6. The party of Old Whigs.
  7. The Tories, or the party of George III.
  8. The party of New Whigs and its aims.
  9. Why George III was so bitter against Pitt.
  10. The attitude of the King toward taxation in America.
  11. The people of England not our enemies, etc.

At the close of these topics there follows a list of fifteen “Suggestive Questions and Directions,” with page references to Fiske’s “The American Revolution,” Vol. I, the whole being concluded by eighteen topics for collateral reading from “The American Revolution,” and from Cooke’s “Virginia.”[26]

It is a significant fact that modern text-books for children are being prepared by masters in the various departments of knowledge, not a little thought being bestowed upon the highest utilization of all modern instruments for arousing the intelligent interest of the pupils. This being the case, it is idle to rely upon primitive methods, however potent they may have been in the past, with pupils who have learned to read fluently.

[25] Larned, “History of England,” Houghton, Mifflin & Co., p. 396.

[26] Fiske, John, “A History of the United States for Schools,” Houghton, Mifflin & Co., Boston, pp. 211–215.

[248.] The general surveys that follow the detailed narratives have this advantage for the pupil: he infers of his own accord, that in periods of which not much is told, a great deal took place, nevertheless, which the history or the teacher passes over in silence. In this way the false impressions are prevented that would be produced by purely compendious instruction, which indeed, at a later stage, becomes in a measure unavoidable.

[249.] (3) Mediæval history derives no assistance from the study of the ancient languages, nor is it closely related to present conditions; there is difficulty in imparting to the presentation of it more than the clearness obtainable through geography and chronology. But more than this is requisite: the burden of mere memory work without interest would become too great. The fundamental factors, Islamism, Papacy, the Holy Roman Empire, Feudalism, must be explained and given due prominence. Most of the facts down to Charlemagne may be made to contribute additional touches to the panorama of the Great Migration. With Charlemagne the chain of German history begins, and it will usually be considered advisable to extend this chain to the end of the Middle Ages, in order to have something to which synchronous events may be linked later on. Yet some doubt arises as to the value of such a plan. To be sure, the reigns of the Ottos, the Henrys, the Hohenstaufen, together with intervening occurrences, form a tolerably well-connected whole; but as early as the interregnum there is a sad break, and although the historical narrative recovers, as it were, with the stories of Rudolph Albrecht and Ludwig the Bavarian, there is nothing in the names of succeeding leaders, from Carl IV to Frederick III, that would make them proper starting-points and connecting centres for the synchronism of the whole period in question. It might be better, therefore, to stop with the excommunication of Ludwig the Bavarian, with the assembly of the electors at Rhense, and with the account of how the popes came to reside in Avignon. Then—going back to Charlemagne—France, Italy, even England, may be taken up, and greater completeness given to the history of the crusades. Farther on, special attention might be called, in a synchronistic way, to Burgundy and Switzerland, and to the changing fortunes of the wars between England and France. French history may then leave off with the reign of Charles VIII, and English history with that of Henry VII, while German history, from Maximilian on, is placed again in the foreground. The Hussite wars will be treated as forerunners of the Reformation. Other events must be skilfully inserted. Many modifications of grouping will have to be reserved for subsequent repetitions.

[250.] (4) In presenting modern history, the teacher will do well to avail himself of the fact that modern history does not cover so long reaches of time as mediæval history does, and that it falls into three sharply defined periods, the first of which ends with the treaty of Westphalia, the second extends from this date to the French Revolution, and the third, to the present. These periods should be carefully distinguished, the leading events of each should be narrated synchronistically, and a recital of the most essential historical facts about each country should follow. Only after each has been handled in this way, and the subject-matter presented has been thoroughly impressed upon the memory by reviews, will it be well to pass on to a somewhat fuller ethnographical account reaching back into the mediæval history of each country and extending forward to our own times. No harm is done by going over the same ground again for the purpose of amplifying that which before appeared in outline only.