Introduction 

Stephen Tomlinson 

University of Alabama 

 

Evolving from Post-Reformation visions of religious piety, Prussia and other German states looked to 

the expansion of public schooling to improve literacy and promote practical Christianity. This 

necessitated instruction grounded in a theocentric conception of human nature and the social good. 

Reason and action had to be guided by the dictates of Scripture and a Biblically sanctioned knowledge 

of Creation. Enlightenment thought brought a profound shift in ideas about mind and society, initiating 

what might best be described as a Copernican Revolution in pedagogy. Rather than imposing order 

from without, educators now looked to the development of the innate potential within. Educability and 

the notion of Bildung—variously applied to the instruction of different social classes—justified 

humanistic ideals of individual autonomy and the historical progress of civilization. Papers in this 

special issue examine these changing visions of pedagogy and explore how they were exported to the 

world as a panacea for the social ills that beset modern society.   

 

Throughout the 1830s reformers in both 

Britain and America looked upon educational 

developments in France and Germany with great 

interest. Victor Cousin’s 1832 Report on the State 

of Public Instruction in Prussia translated into 

English by Sarah Austin (1834), provided a 

compelling blueprint for how the state might 

organize an effective system of public schooling. 

From the funding and supervision of district 

schools to the training of teachers, the measures 

adapted to rejuvenate the nation after the 

Napoleonic Wars made Prussian education the 

envy of Europe. Indeed, under the guidance of 

Francois Guizot, the Minister for Public Instruction 

during the July Monarchy, Cousin’s Report formed 

the basis of the 1833 law that established 

elementary schooling throughout France.  

The Report also played a central role in 

parallel English and American campaigns to 

engage government in the administration of 

schooling. On both sides of the Atlantic, the 

expansion and improvement of instruction was 

presented as an obligation of the state; a moral 

responsibility to raise the character of the 

population and ensure all citizens understood their 

civic and religious duties. The problem of social 

order was key, especially in urban-industrial areas. 

But progressive voices also looked to the historical 

advancement of Christian civilization. Rather than 

an economy of compliance, the pedagogic methods 

perfected in Prussia promised to create a society 

based upon rational cooperation and the 

imperatives of a shared faith. 

Historical accounts of this crucial decade 

have typically focused on the dynamics of church 

and state relations to explain why entrenched 

sectarian differences thwarted fundamental reform 

in Britain, while pan-Protestant cooperation 

ensured the movement’s success in America 

(Smelser, 1991; Komline, 2020). Rather less 

attention has been paid to the religious and 

philosophical traditions that underwrote the 

instructional methods at the heart of Prussian 

schooling. It was sufficient, it seems, to associate 

the new pedagogy with the iconic names of 

Pestalozzi or Fellenberg. Certainly, their 

celebrated achievements at Yverdon and Hofwyl 

inspired the establishment of teaching seminaries 

across Germany, but these institutions and the 

practices they perfected also drew upon a long and 

rich history of ideas about the aims and methods of 

education not readily apparent to the Anglo-Saxon 

reader. Often described as “the age of pedagogy,” 

German thought in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth 

centuries was preoccupied with questions about 

human nature and the social good (Munzel, 2012). 

Understanding the mind—the role of language, 

reason, and the passions—offered a key to the 



 

 

ii 
 

meaning and purpose of life. It also pointed to the 

power of education as an instrument of human 

improvement.  

A Copernican Revolution in Pedagogy 

The papers in this issue explore the situated 

roots of pedagogic theory from the religiously 

inspired missions of Comenius and the German 

Pietists, to the idealistic notions of perfection and 

historical progress that arose in the course of the 

German Enlightenment. While there are substantial 

continuities between these theological and the 

philosophical approaches, they nonetheless frame 

the human condition in radically different ways.  

Stephen Tomlinson explains, in “Comenius 

and the Didactic Order of a Godly Society,” that 

Comenius sought to initiate a second Reformation 

through a program of universal schooling designed 

to overcome the evils of original sin and restore 

Mankind to its prelapsarian state. Employing a 

developmentally appropriate Ramist logic, 

revealed and scientific truths about God’s Creation 

would be used to teach the imperatives of practical 

Christianity and heal the faculties damaged by 

Adam’s fall. While Comenius’ efforts to initiate 

this program in England were frustrated by the 

advent of war, his Christian Philosophy and 

realistic, sense-based methods of instruction 

played a significant role in the pietistic pedagogy 

developed by August Francke at the University of 

Halle—the site of Prussia’s first teaching 

seminary. Stressing praxis over doctrine, Fancke 

sought to reformulate theological training in order 

to prepare clergy and teachers with the practical 

skills necessary to lead a pious Christian 

community.  

Crucially, Tomlinson continues in 

“German Pietism and the Pedagogic Reformation 

of Human Nature,” this involved expanding 

Comenius’ focus on rational understanding to the 

awakening of the individual’s spiritual nature. 

Harnessing the power of the Divine Word, the 

inspiring lessons of Scripture would be employed 

to excite religious sentiments and encourage 

conversion; the free acceptance of God’s will and 

a life modeled on the example of Christ, the New 

Adam. This psychologically based method of 

internal control also served an important political 

purpose. Seamlessly aligning with the interests of 

the state, its core values of obedience, neighborly 

love, and personal industry were embraced by the 

Prussian monarchy to further the ideological 

control of the population.  

In “Piety Rationalized: Cotton Mather, 

Jonathan Edwards, and the Ramsit Logic of 

Method” Douglas McKnight reveals how Puritan 

divines in England and North American colonies 

embraced similar hopes for the transformative 

power of religious education. Indeed, Francke’s 

work at the Halle Orphanage, translated and 

popularized in Britain by his former student 

Anthony William Boehm, informed and energized 

the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge 

both in its support of charity schooling and its 

missionary efforts to instrumentalize the spiritual 

power of the Bible (Jones, 2019). Francke’s place 

in the history of education is also marked by his 

academic and personal contest with the rationalist 

scholar Christian Wolff, a clash over the nature of 

mind that affirmed the supremacy of the 

theological faculty at Halle. But Wolff’s expulsion 

from the University in 1723 only served to 

highlight the claims of reason. With the spread of 

enlightenment thought, his forceful writings gained 

authority, restoring philosophy to the forefront of 

academic learning; even at Halle, where he was 

reinstated by Fredrich II in 1740.   

“Enlightenment,” Kant (1999) famously 

argued, “is man’s release from his self-imposed 

minority (1999) to make use of his understanding 

without direction from another” (p. 17). This vision 

of education stands in stark contrast to his own 

schooling at the pietist academy in Konigsberg—a 

program, he later complained, that “that robs 

people of the courage to think for themselves . . . 

and spoils the genius” (Kuehn, 2001, p. 45). 

Inspired by Locke and Rousseau, his own writings 

on pedagogy offered a fundamentally different 

view of human nature and a radically different 

course of instruction. Rather than imposing order 

from without, he would develop the innate 

potential within.   



 

 

iii 
 

Kant’s early scholarly work embraced 

Wolff’s rationalism. Adopting the Newtonian 

worldview, he sought an empirical explanation for 

the lawful structure of experience. Central to this 

project was an understanding of the self as a 

knowing subject, an ever-present topic throughout 

his many works but the special focus of the 

Anthropology (2007). Here he noted Mankind’s 

unique capacity for rational thought. Animals had 

instincts perfectly adapted for life, but humans 

were born incomplete; socially dependent, our 

nature must be formed through education. This 

raised the pivotal question, “What should men and 

women make of their lives?” Kant’s answer went 

beyond meeting physiological needs and 

promoting happiness to moralization, the 

realization of the individual’s capacity for free and 

rational action. Contrary to pietistic teachings of 

his youth, Kant (2007) thus extolled the essential 

dignity of humanity. Given the power of the 

emotions, he recognized this ethical goal would not 

be achieved easily; the movement from animality 

to autonomy would be the work of history. “An 

immense series of generations, each of which 

transmits its enlightenment to the next” was 

required for Mankind “to propel its germs . . . to 

that stage of development which is completely 

suited to its aim” (p. 110). Refinement in the arts 

would produce more elevated sentiments and the 

laws and customs of increasingly just societies 

would help temper the passions. Formal education 

was also important. Schooling had to guide 

children through the same stages of discipline, 

cultivation, civilization, and moralization the 

species was undergoing through history. If this 

were not yet possible for all, he called for an 

educated elite others could emulate (Louden, 

2011).  

Kant’s (2007) ideal of human formation 

(Bildung) involved a moment of “crystallization” 

or “rebirth” when, after discovering the power of 

their own thought, an individual could assert their 

capacity to govern themselves rationally. Similar 

tropes aside, this epistemological shift from a 

theologically to a philosophically based 

anthropology marked a profound reformulation of 

the educational project. Rather than facing God 

fearful of their corruption, children were to 

cultivate their nature as free, rational, and moral 

beings. This formative sketch, laid out in Kant’s 

(2007) fragmentary Lectures on Pedagogy, was the 

starting point for his successor at Königsberg, 

Johann Friedrich Herbart.  

In “J. F. Herbart on the Art of Teaching: 

Bildsamkeit and Pedagogical Tact,” Christine 

Becks describes how Herbert became one of the 

most influential (if misunderstood) theorists 

among Nineteenth Century English and American 

educators. The overarching goal of his 

foundational Science of Education (1896) was to 

help teachers facilitate the student’s personal 

struggle for autonomy (much as Dewey 

psychologized the learning situation) through an 

empathic understanding of their developing ability 

to reason—the practical art of teaching captured in 

the concept of pedagogic tact. Faced with the 

problem of developing an efficient system of 

schooling to meet the needs of the modern society, 

late Nineteenth Century German and American 

educators looked to Herbart’s insights as the basis 

for scientific approach to instruction. But while 

Herbartianism’s focus on the learner caught the 

spirit of Progressive era reforms, its quest for 

standardization and technocratic order undermined 

the uniqueness of the individual and the 

educational situation. For Becks, such narrow 

conceptions of learning continue to frustrate 

effective approaches to the pedagogic art. Drawing 

upon the framework of practical action central to 

German didactic tradition she thus offers a 

compelling justification for revisiting the 

foundations of curricula thought envisioned by 

Herbart and his even more influential 

contemporary, Wilhelm von Humboldt. 

   

The Linguistic Turn 

The product of a similar pietistic education, 

Kant’s one-time student, Johann Gottfried Herder 

offered a significant adaptation of this educational 

project. While committed to a scientific 

explanation of mind, he rejected the narrow 

enlightenment focus on reason for a broader 



 

 

iv 
 

appreciation of the holistic relationship between 

language, thought, and the social context of 

experience. Drawing upon the teachings of the 

Göttingen naturalist Johann Friedrich 

Blumenbach, Herder explained all life through the 

action of vital forces. In the case of human beings, 

these formative drives (Bildungstriebe) led to the 

development of mental powers adapted to cultural 

norms and practices (Herder and Churchill, 1803). 

The mind was thus shaped by the historically 

situated institutions and arts that comprised the 

character and values of a people. This suggested a 

rather different approach to schooling. Starting 

with the inherent diversity of human talents, 

Herder looked to the social encounters by which 

individuals constructed meaning and thus formed 

their own unique identity—a dynamic process that 

began within the intimate and tradition-based 

context of family and community life and 

continued through wider exchanges with other 

cultures. Bildung resulted from the varied and rich 

interactions that promoted the full and harmonious 

development of each person’s innate potential.  

As Herder knew from his own teaching 

experiences the narrow orbit of traditional 

schooling offered little to the expanding mind 

(Clark, 1955). In place of proficiency in Latin and 

the memorization of text, he advocated vernacular 

instruction that would encourage the child and the 

nation to think for themselves. Schooling had to 

excite the student’s natural curiosity and 

demonstrate their essential agency as creators of 

meaning and value. In 1776 Herder was appointed 

superintendent of schools and churches in the 

Duchy of Weimar. Here, in the home of Goethe, 

Wieland, and Schiller, he sought to enact the 

pedagogic ideas that flowed from his philosophical 

project—most importantly, through the 

refashioning of secondary education. Convinced 

that emulation of the ancient Greeks would enliven 

the German spirit, he instituted classical studies 

designed to engage students with the most 

remarkable minds in history; a program of 

humanization, which under the reforms initiated by 

von Humboldt, would shape the German 

Gymnasium and university in the coming century 

(Schleunes, 1989).  

 

The Politics of Bildung 

Von Humboldt’s own commitment to the 

notion of Bildung took root in the intense and 

exciting intellectual culture fueled by the ethical, 

linguistic, and historical ideas of Kant and Herder. 

Combined with a deep reverence for the Greeks, 

human development itself became an object of 

aesthetic interest; a creative task of self-formation 

in which the individual must struggle to realize 

their inner potential. It is remarkable that this 

profound philosophical vision and its associated 

pedagogic practices would become the governing 

rationale for the revolutionary educational reforms 

set in motion during the most desperate moments 

in Prussia’s history.  

Following its devastating defeat to 

Napoleon in 1806, half the nation was annexed, 

and its economy burdened with crippling 

reparations. Under the terms of the treaty agreed 

the following year at Tilsit, Prussia was also forced 

to enact the republican reforms required of 

France’s compliant states (Clark, 2007). Granted 

sweeping powers by Frederick William III, Baron 

Karl von Stein set about dismantling the political 

structures of the Ancien Régime. Serfdom was 

abolished, laws governing trade and the ownership 

of property were liberalized, and municipal 

governments were established across the country. 

Subjects were to become citizens whose common 

rights would be protected by an efficient and well-

ordered bureaucracy. As Stein recognized, the 

entire process turned on the promise of education. 

Best captured in Fichte’s 1808 Addresses to the 

German Nation (2008) Prussia’s rejuvenation from 

material destruction rested on the creation of a free, 

independent, and ethical population united in their 

loyalty to king and country. Fichte also identified 

the instructional methods perfected by Pestalozzi 

as the best means to secure this spiritual rebirth. 

Stein was equally enthusiastic. Establishing a 

Ministry of the Interior with a section dedicated to 

religion and public instruction, he appointed the 

Königsberg professor Johann Wilhelm Süvern and 



 

 

v 
 

a number of other liberal thinkers to advance the 

training of teachers in the new pedagogy as he 

pressured von Humboldt into accepting leadership 

of the department (Sweet, 1978). By January 1809 

when von Humboldt finally took control, Stein had 

been ousted by Napoleon. His own tenure would 

last a mere 15 months, but during that time he was 

able to marshal the incipient plans developed by 

the group into a single, coherent program that 

would serve as an ideal for future reform.  

Given his aristocratic upbringing at the 

hands of private tutors left him with little 

knowledge of public schooling, von Humboldt was 

happy to support the measures already underway 

for the improvement of elementary instruction; 

most notably through the establishment of 

Pestalozzian teaching seminaries. His interest lay 

more with the equally pressing problem of 

reorganizing secondary and higher education. A 

confusing patchwork of schools with widely 

varying curricula and academic standards had to be 

reconciled; and, in the wake of Napoleon’s 

conquests, the loss of the University of Halle was 

to be remedied by a new site of learning in Berlin. 

This was an opportunity to establish a higher 

standard of intellectual and moral leadership for the 

nation. No task could have been more suited to his 

personal preoccupation with human genius.  

Nurtured in his youth by the leading lights 

of the Berlin intelligentsia, Humboldt’s nascent 

interests in philosophy and language led him to the 

University of Göttingen, which by the 1780s, had 

become Germany’s premier institution for 

scientific, historical, and philological studies. Here 

the goal of Wissenschaft united with that of 

personal growth, suggesting the intimate 

relationship between the ordered advancement of 

knowledge and the harmonious development of the 

human faculties. He was particularly taken with the 

progress of the German mind—surely now able to 

rival that of France. Two years later his own quest 

for excellence brought him to Weimar and the 

circle of Schiller and Goethe (Sweet, 1978). By the 

1790s, however, the conditions that fostered such 

intellectual and aesthetic brilliance were under 

attack. With Frederick William II on the throne, a 

more conservative ministry chastened by events in 

Paris looked to roll back the religious freedoms 

enjoyed under Fredrich II; even Kant’s (2001) 

Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason 

was censored. Von Humboldt’s response was to 

defend the notion of Bildung in what would 

become a classic text of laissez-faire policy, The 

Limits of State Action (2008). Much as Herder 

argued, he drew upon Blumenbach’s vitalism to 

explain human development and demonstrate that 

individuals would only realize their unique 

potential when given the freedom to encounter the 

widest variety of experiences. Forces of 

centralization and political conformity only served 

to narrow and stultify the opportunity for growth. 

Government, he insisted, had to “refrain from 

every attempt to operate directly or indirectly on 

the morals and character of the nation,” most 

especially in the regulation of education and 

religion (p. 81). 

By 1809 Humboldt’s thought had evolved 

to embrace a more positive role for the state. Given 

the historical situation, he recognized the 

government’s duty to create the conditions 

necessary for human Bildung. From the elementary 

school to the university, every individual had to 

receive a common, general education designed to 

develop their moral and intellectual powers. 

Vocational and narrowly focused class-based 

teaching would only undermine the larger political 

object of nation building. This was a truly radical 

departure from earlier proposals to improve public 

instruction which stressed sperate schooling for the 

different social orders (Melton, 2003). But von 

Humboldt was adamant that the realities of life 

would prevent social levelling. The key thing was 

to create a sense of national identity by unifying the 

population with a common appreciation for the 

worth and dignity of all, irrespective of their 

station.  

The example of Göttingen had clear and 

obvious implications for the new University of 

Berlin. After the loss of Halle, Schelling, Fichte, 

and others offered programmatic visons of a future 

institute dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge 

(Howard, 2006). Even so, Stefan Becks argues in 



 

 

vi 
 

“More than a Theologian: Friedrich 

Schleiermacher’s Mark on Education,” it was the 

blueprint of Friedrich Schleiermacher that most 

impressed von Humboldt. Greatly influenced by 

Herder’s writings on language and mind, he put 

forward a passionate case for a university true to 

the spirit of the German nation. In contrast to the 

special schools and technical academies of the 

French, this required a commitment to the twin 

goals of individual development and intellectual 

inquiry. If the majority would not become 

researchers themselves, Schleiermacher was 

adamant that they should understand the purpose of 

rational advancement; indeed, he argued, there was 

no better preparation for professional training. Free 

from religious and political constraint, philosophy 

would be allowed to thrive for the benefit of the 

individual and the nation. Even theology would 

prosper by embracing science. Presented by von 

Humboldt, this union of Bildung and Wissenschaft 

underwrote the blueprint for the University of 

Berlin (officially opened in 1810), which by 

midcentury would become the model of the 

modern research university. 

As Robert Anderson (2004) notes, the same 

holds true for von Humboldt’s vision of secondary 

education. Regulations were instituted to 

standardize the Gymnasium around a secular, 

classically oriented curriculum designed to perfect 

the mind and character in preparation for higher 

education. Teachers had to earn a university degree 

(more often in philosophy than theology) and 

students were required to complete an eight-year 

course of study ending in a culminating 

examination, the Abitur. But von Humboldt’s plans 

for elementary schooling proved far less 

successful. While the expansion of teacher training 

moved forward, the wars that engulfed the 

continent between 1812 and 1815 undermined any 

opportunity for meaningful reform. Then, with 

Napoleon’s defeat, the Congress of Vienna 

completely redrew the map of Europe, restoring 

Prussian territories and granting lands that greatly 

expanded its size. A new problem thus emerged; 

how to unite a linguistically, religiously, and 

culturally diverse population within a single state. 

Recognizing the role of education, the department 

was transformed into a ministry under the 

leadership of Karl von Altenstein and charged with 

developing a comprehensive law for elementary 

schooling across Prussia (Schleunes, 1989). In 

1819 a proposal drafted by Süvern was sent out for 

review. True to the philosophical aims and 

egalitarian spirit of von Humboldt’s program it 

quickly fell foul of conservative critics. In place of 

nation building, events across Europe now stirred 

fears about the destructive passions of the masses. 

Indeed, by teaching peasants to think for 

themselves many feared Pestalozzian pedagogy 

would incite revolution. Looking back to the 

stability of the traditional order brought calls for a 

firmer hierarchy of functionally distinct classes.  

Far from fostering an idealistic notion of humanity, 

education had to focus on vocation and the 

practical needs of life. Most importantly, the lower 

ranks had to be taught the kind of religious 

conformity celebrated by Francke. Accordingly, 

where Süvern proposed a general curriculum 

composed of language, literature, mathematics, 

history, and geography the leading voices of the 

Prussian Vormärz demanded that elementary 

education for the largely rural population be 

restricted to “Positive Christianity” (Schleunes, 

1989). Burgher Schools could be established to 

provide occupationally relevant coursework for the 

urban manufacturing and commercial classes, but 

neither would serve as a steppingstone to the 

Gymnasium. Tailored to the higher orders, this 

remained the sole avenue to university and the 

learned professions. Given the linguistic, legal, and 

religious differences of Prussia’s new lands, no 

comprehensive legislation was enacted. However, 

teaching seminaries were held to a tighter mission. 

Eschewing unnecessary learning, rural 

schoolmasters were pressed to focus on religion, 

morals, and basic literacy. Contrary to Süvern’s 

proposal, the goal of Bildung firmly planted in the 

secondary and higher education of the higher 

classes, was replaced by the cultivation of religious 

piety for the general population. 

In one respect at least, the Prussian system 

was highly successful. After analyzing Altenstein’s 



 

 

vii 
 

returns for 1831, Cousin could report that with the 

extension of attendance laws to the new territories, 

99% of children aged 7 to 14 were enrolled in 

elementary schools, more than twice that of France 

or England. Along with the modest cost to the 

government, such statistics clearly impressed 

foreign observers. Yet as Tomlinson demonstrates 

in the final paper of this issue, “Victor Cousin, 

Sarah Austin, and the Cause of National 

Education,” it was the quality of instruction that 

proved key for British American reformers. 

Impressed by the transformative power of 

Pestalozzian pedagogy, the Prussian master and the 

teaching seminary were presented as proof that 

education could improve human nature and create 

a more religious and enlightened society—a 

project itself informed by the spread of German 

ideas about mind, culture, and civilization. 

 

References 

Anderson, R. (2004). The idea of the secondary 

school in nineteenth‐century 

Europe. Paedagogica Historica, 40(1/2), 93-

106. 

Clark, C. (2007). Iron kingdom: The rise and 

downfall of Prussia, 1600-1947. Penguin 

Books Limited. 

Clark, R. T. (1955). Herder: His life and 

thought. University of California Press. 

Cousin, V., Austin, S. (1834). Report on the state 

of public instruction in Prussia. Effingham & 

Wilson. 

Fichte, J. G. (2008). Fichte: Addresses to the 

German nation. Cambridge University Press. 

Herbart, J. F. (1896). The Science of education, its 

general principles deduced from its aim. DC 

Heath & Company. 

Herder, J. G., Churchill, T. O. (1803). Outlines of 

a philosophy of the history of man. J. Johnson.  

Howard, T. A. (2006). Protestant theology and the 

making of the modern German university. 

Oxford University Press. 

Humboldt, W. v. (2008). The limits of state 

action. Cambridge University Press. 

Jones, M. G. (2019). The charity school 

movement: A study of Eighteenth Century 

puritanism in action. Taylor & Francis. 

Kant, I. (1999). Practical philosophy. Cambridge 

University Press. 

Kant, I. (2001). Religion and rational 

theology. Cambridge University Press. 

Kant, I. (2007). Anthropology, history, and 

education. Cambridge University Press. 

Komline, D. R. (2020). The common school 

awakening: Education and religion, 1800-

1848. Oxford University Press. 

Kuehn, M. (2001). Kant: A biography. Cambridge 

University Press.  

Louden, R. B. (2011). Kant's human being: Essays 

on his theory of human nature. Oxford 

University Press. 

Melton, J. v. H. (2003). Absolutism and the 

Eighteenth-Century origins of compulsory 

schooling in Prussia and Austria. Cambridge 

University Press. 

Munzel, G. F. (2012). Kant's conception of 

pedagogy: Toward education for freedom. 

Northwestern University Press. 

Schleunes, K. A. (1989). Schooling and society: 

the politics of education in Prussia and 

Bavaria, 1750-1900. Berg Pub Limited. 

Smelser, N. J. (1991). Social paralysis and social 

change: British working-class education in the 

Nineteenth Century. University of California 

Press. 

Sweet, P. R. (1978). Wilhelm von Humboldt: 

1767-1808. Ohio State University Press. 

 

 

 

Manuscript submitted March 8, 2022 

Revision received August 23, 2022 

Manuscript accepted August 24, 2022