11. There appears to be less strictness in enforcing the regulations connected with military education in Prussia than in France. The regulations themselves are very stringent, but exceptions are constantly sanctioned—for instance, in the length of time which a pupil is permitted to remain in the same class of the Cadet Schools, in the number of failures allowed in the various examinations, &c.
[12.] The very great care bestowed upon the method of instruction at all the Prussian military schools, is extremely remarkable. Individual instructors are not left to follow out their own ideas of teaching, but careful regulations are issued for their guidance by the Inspector-General of Education, to which all are required strictly to conform. The system of small classes in striking contrast to the French plan of lectures to large numbers, is a remarkable instance of the anxiety to devote attention to individual students, and to adapt the instruction to varieties of ability. But the most remarkable feature of the system of teaching is the care bestowed upon the higher objects of education, upon forming and disciplining the mind and encouraging habits of reflection. The regulations for the instructors at the various schools over and over again assert that the great object to be kept in view is, not merely to impart a certain amount of positive knowledge, but to develope the intellectual faculties and to cultivate powers of thought and reasoning. The teachers are warned to avoid minute details and barren facts, which merely burden the memory and are soon forgotten, and to direct attention to broad principles, which will lay the foundation for further individual study in after life. With the same object in view, the examination questions are calculated, not merely to serve as an exercise of the memory, but to test an intelligent acquaintance with a subject, and the power of turning knowledge to a useful purpose.
Footnotes for Part II: Prussia
[1] Compiled from the “Report, and Accompanying Documents of the Royal Commission on Foreign Military Education,” 1857.
[2] Thus Landsturm is the word used for the rising en masse of the Tyrol in 1809.
[3] The chief authority for this paper is a very detailed account of the Staff School, (Kriegs-Schule,) by Friedländer, pp. 1-360.
[4] “Histoire de mon Temps.”—Œuvres, vi., p. 99.
[5] He gives himself, in his forcible style, the reasons for his attention to early military schools. He had found his young nobility excessively averse to such education. “They shrink from the army,” he said, “because in this country it is a real training for the character. Nothing is passed over in a young officer; he is obliged to maintain a prudent, regular, and sensible conduct. . . . . . This is precisely what they dislike, and one still hears the absurd and insolent expression, ‘If my boy will not work, he will do none the worse for a soldier.’ Yes, he may do for a mere man-at-arms (fantassin,) but not for an officer fit to be advanced to the highest commands, the only end of a good soldier’s life, and which requires a really extensive knowledge.”—Œuvres, ix., 117, 120.
[6] This certificate, according to a statement received in conversation, is in the first instance from the officers of the company, to the effect that the ensign in question is well conducted and likely to be a desirable addition to their number; then from the major of the battalion, and from the colonel of the regiment.
[7] Not from the Tutors, but from the non-resident Professors and Teachers.