Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

1

Mightinesses that you would be pleased to order that some general rules for the government of such schools be drawn up and prepared, by and with the advice of such learned men who understand best what relates to the instruction of youth whereby those defects which are so frequently observed in schools may be mended, and as far as possible a uniform method of teaching be established, especially in the principles of grammar, logic, and rhetoric." The particular synods concerned themselves with the Latin schools mostly, it is true, about subscription to the creed on the part of the masters, but also about matters more interesting to us now. In 1627 the question was raised in the synod of South Holland as to whether the fundamentals of Hebrew should not be taught in the trivial schools (in scholis trivialibus fundamenta Hæbraicæ linguæ). The answer was that, while this was desirable, it had better be left to the discretion of those concerned with the schools. In 1634 "a rector of a trivial school, who is a member of the church and in a certain sense also a servant of the church, asks whether children under pretext of good exercises should be allowed to learn to present a comedy." It was answered that such was opposed to God's word and could not be granted. The inquiry referred, of course, to the common Renaissance practice of presenting classical plays as school exercises, to which, however, strong opposition had now arisen from moral and other Puritanic considerations. The strong hold which the Latin school had then is partly explained by the fact that Latin was necessary to advancement along any professional or official line. Schotel quotes some verses:

Those who want to become men of importance,

Will be prepared in school.

Notaries, clerks, treasurers, or those who want an office
Must go to school and learn Latin well.

Following Douma (p. 94), we may say that the trivial or Latin schools were found in nearly all cities. These schools were not always higher than ordinary elementary schools, but stood on the same level as the latter. The pupils were often admitted in their eighth year. The school laws of Leeuwarden (1638, renewed 1701) show a school conducted by a rector and four subordinate teachers, all owing obedience "to the honorable magistrates." No pupils were admitted who did not know how to read. Declensions and conjugations were at first the chief subjects. Then came explanations from Latin and Greek authors. The Heidelberg Catechism was of course not forgotten. The Vestibulum of Comenius or the Distichs of Cato were used. The New Testament was translated from the Greek, and Greek composition taught.

1 177th session. Brandt, op. cit., iii, 326.
2 Acta, i, 220.

3 Ibid., ii, 32.

Op. cit., p. 101.

That education was, on the whole, widespread throughout the Netherlands is abundantly evident, although definite statements are difficult to make. Woltjer quotes a traveler of the latter part of the sixteenth century, one Guiciardini, who says of Holland: "The common people generally know the fundamentals of grammar, and all the people, even the peasants and the country folk, know at least how to read and write. Besides, they know the art and science of the ordinary languages so generally and so well that one is really surprised. Many people who never left the country speak several foreign languages, especially French, which is spoken by almost everybody. Many speak German, English, Italian, and other foreign tongues.' The same author quotes the Englishman, Josiah Childe, as saying in 1665: "The Dutchmen always take good care of the education and A

instruction of their children, daughters as well as sons * * *.

Dutchman, however inferior in class or station or ability he may be, always takes care that his children learn how to write a good hand and the art of counting; he even wants them to become competent in the arithmetic of commerce."1

While these statements are too sweeping to be accepted literally, evidently both writers considered that the educational situation among the Dutch was much in advance of what they know more intimately elsewhere; an opinion in which it is easy to concur.

That public schools abounded throughout the Netherlands is equally evident. Every study of the archives of town or province discloses their presence. The minutes of every religious body bear overwhelming testimony not only to the existence of schools but also a zealous interest in their maintenance. It is proper to note that while the sixteenth century church enactments call for the establishment of schools, almost none among the multitudinous school references of the seventeenth century are concerned with this problem. The complaint of the seventeenth century synods is not the lack of schools, but the poor pay of teachers and the consequent inferior service; not the need of Protestant schools, but the presence of Roman Catholic and other heterodox masters; not the establishment of schools, but the proper regulations of schools already in existence."

1 Woltjer, Christelijk Nationaal Schoolonderwijs, p. 75.

2 Two specific references may properly be mentioned in this connection. In 1608 at a regular session of the Classis of Drenthe the Roede church reported that it had no school. However, not only was a reasonable excuse offered for such a delinquency, but the report further stated that a private school had been maintained (Reitsma, op. cit., viii, 91-2). This is a clear instance of the exception that proves the rule. The second reference has been widely used as implying lack of schools in the Netherlands. In fact, it is perhaps the most widely known of all sources bearing on early Dutch schools, being an act of the Synod of Dort (1618-9), seventeenth session: "Schools *** shall be established not only in cities but also in towns and country places, where heretofore none have existed." (Translation from Dunshee, op. cit., p. 4.) A frequent interpretation of this has been that heretofore no schools have existed in towns and country places; and the words as given appear to authorize, though not to demand, this interpretation. The Latin original, however, decides otherwise: "Schola * ** in singulis pagis instituantur, sicubi hactenus nullæ institutæ fuerunt" (Acta Synodi * ** Dordrechti, p. 61). So that a truer rendering

The word "public" used just above in connection with these schools was chosen advisedly. Although tuition was regularly charged-contrary to the present American conception-nevertheless the public authorities, partly civil and partly ecclesiastical, provided the school, examined, and licensed the teacher, paid him a salary, and by law regulated what he should teach, what books he should use, and the conditions under which he should in general conduct his school. In many places school supervisors (scholarchen, opsienders), corresponding in part to our school board and in part to school inspectors, were provided by civil enactment to exercise general supervision of school affairs. In at least one instance (Leiden, 1652) an officer, much like a modern expert supervisor, was provided at public expense to see, among other things, that the masters and dames "treated the children well." In these many respects did seventeenth century Holland approximate the public school system of to-day.

The elementary school of the Netherlands was thus a public parochial school, admitting girls and boys alike, teaching them two of the three R's, less often the third, but never omitting the catechism. The master, while serving the school, generally served also the church by taking a stated part in its regular Sunday service. The control of the school devolved upon both ecclesiastical and secular authorities. It was this school which was reproduced almost identically in the Dutch villages of Holland America.

of the doubtful clause would be, "if anywhere heretofore none have been established." The contemporaneous Dutch rendering of the original Latin is to the same effect: "Soo erghens voor desen geene en zihn opgerecht gheweest" (Acta ofte Handelinghen *** Synodi * ** tot Dordrecht, p. 55). Mr. Van Laer translates this, "if (in case) in any of these places (literally anywhere') heretofore none have been established." (Letter to the writer, March 6, 1911). The proper interpretation, then, of the act of the synod puts the presumption on the other side. Schools were so general that even the exceptional lack had to be expressed contingently.

1 Buddingh, op. cit., p. 75; Rutgers, op. cit., p. 641; Van Flensburg, op. cit., vii, 382, etc. 2 Buddingh, op. cit., pp. 143-4.

CHAPTER III.

THE DATE OF THE FIRST SCHOOL IN NEW NETHERLAND.1

"In the year 1633 the first school was established by the Dutch at New Amsterdam," " Statements to this effect have found their way into print many times in the past 60 years; and the fact thus asserted has been accepted as a fact established by practically all writers on the history of education. But some information recently made accessible seems to point to a later date as being the more probable.

The Ecclesiastical Records of the State of New York 3 give, for the first time in accessible English form, certain records of the Reformed Dutch Church in Holland that throw considerable light on the educational history of the Dutch in New Netherland and colonial New York.

In a way, which will be more exactly shown in Chapter V, the conduct of the public schools in New Netherland was partially under the control of the Classis of Amsterdam, which was that division of the Reformed Dutch Church of the Netherlands exercising ecclesiastical control over New Netherland throughout most of the Dutch period (and over the Reformed Dutch churches in New York till 1772). In the records of this classis we find the following among the "Regulations relating to the East India and West India affairs, etc., devised by the deputies of the classis appointed therefor April 1636:4

7,

499

VI. Of the Schoolmasters:

In case any schoolmasters shall be sent to any of these foreign fields, the same
shall be pursued with them
as with the siecken-

course
troosters

[blocks in formation]

* *

II. Of the siecken-troosters (comforters of the sick):

*

1. The siecken-troosters must present themselves, as far as practicable, before the classis. The classis must endeavor to have a good supply of these on hand, and shall decide which out of all of them shall first be recommended by the deputies to the companies.

2. The examination of the siecken-troosters shall be conducted by the brethren deputies, who shall bring in a report thereof at the next classis."

From the "Instructions and letter of credentials for schoolmasters going to the East or West Indies or elsewhere," adopted June 7, 1636,

1 A portion of this chapter has previously appeared in the Educational Review, and is here reproduced by permission.

2 Dexter, History of education in the United States (1904), p. 12.

36v, Albany, 1901-6.

Eccl. Rec., p. 89.

Ibid., p. 91.

• Ibid., p. 89.

the following extract is quoted to show more fully the method of examination and appointment:

Inasmuch as has offered his services, in this capacity, to the committee on ecclesiastical affairs of the said company, and which committee is especially charged therewith by the Classis of Amsterdam: and the said classis having previously inquired as to this individual, and by examination have ascertained his fitness and experience for such a position; that on the report rendered by the said classis, and with the approbation and consent of the said honorable directors, he has been appointed schoolmaster and sent in such capacity to N...... N.............. with these specific instructions.' In accordance with the foregoing regulations, we find the following: Acts of the deputies, Adam Rolands

1639, July 18. Adam Rolands, having requested to go to New Netherland as schoolmaster, reader (voorlezer), and precentor (voorsanger), was accepted, as recommended, upon his good testimonials and the trial of his gifts, on August 4, 1637; and was sent thither.?

3

The date 1639 need not concern us here, but the other date, August 4, 1637, is crucial to our discussion. The Adam Rolands thus examined and licensed on August 4, 1637, bears the same name as the "first schoolmaster" whose teaching career in New Amsterdam is generally supposed to have begun in 1633. But in the document just quoted, he is licensed for that position in 1637. If this certificate were the only evidence bearing upon the date of his entrance into the position in question, no one would hesitate to say that a date earlier than August 4, 1637, should not be assigned. But inasmuch as educational historians, such as Mr. Dexter, say that it is "certain that in 1633" Roelantsen was sent from Holland to be master of the school, we must therefore examine closely before we accept the date indicated by this newly found reference.

5

So far as appears, it was Mr. Dunshee who first gave explicit statement to the since current opinion, and in these words:

1633-In the spring of 1633, Wouter Van Twiller arrived at Manhattan as the second director general of the New Netherlands. In the enumeration of the company's officials of the same year, Everardus Bogardus is mentioned as officiating as minister at Fort Amsterdam, and ADAM ROELANTSEN as the first schoolmaster." (This has as substantiating footnote, Albany records, i, 52).

7

In an extended list of the officers and servants of the Dutch West India Company, in 1638, Rev. Everardus Bogardus is again mentioned as minister at Fort Amsterdam where Adam Roelantsen was still the schoolmaster. (This has as substantiating footnote Albany records, ii, 13-15).

Eccl. Rec., p. 98.

2 ibid., p. 122, where one finds August 4, 1673. Mr. Van Dyke of the Sage Library writes me, however, that "The original transcript says 1637."

3 The name appears variously as Roelants, Roelantsen, Rolands, Roelandson; he himself used the first two of these forms.

4 Op. cit., p. 15.

5 History of the school of the Reformed Dutch Church in the City of New York (1853).

Ibid., p. 28-9.

7 Van der Kemp's MSS. translation of New York Col. MSS. (Dutch) in the State Library.

Dunshee, pp. 29-30. The edition of 1883 gives the same words for these two quotations except that in the first one in place of "In the spring of 1633," we have "In April (prior to the 12th), 1633;” and a reference footnote for "12th" is given to O'Callaghan's History of New Netherland, i, 141–3.

« AnteriorContinuar »