I happened to be there precisely at the time of the great Commission of 1810.  Neither Pestalozzi nor his so-called friends, neither any individuals nor the whole community, could give me, or would give me, what I wanted.  In the methods laid down by them for teaching boys, for the thorough education of boys as part of one great human family,—­that is, for their higher instruction,—­I failed to find that comprehensiveness which is alone sufficient to satisfy the human being.  Thus it was with natural history, natural science, German, and language generally, with history, and above all, with religious instruction.  Pestalozzi’s devotional addresses were very vague, and, as experience showed, were only serviceable to those already in the right way.[70] I spoke of all these things very earnestly and decidedly with Pestalozzi, and at last I made up my mind, in 1810, to quit Yverdon along with my pupils.

But before I continue further here, it is my duty to consider my life and work from yet another point of view.

Amongst the various branches of education, the teaching of languages struck me with especial force as defective, on account of its great imperfection, its capriciousness and lifelessness.  The search for a satisfactory method for our native language occupied me in preference to anything else.  I proceeded on the following basis:—­

Language is an image, a representation of our separate (subject) world, and becomes manifest to the (object) world outside ourselves principally through combined and ordered sounds.  If, therefore, I would image forth anything correctly, I must know the real nature of the original object.  The theme of our imagery and representation, the outside world, contains objects, therefore I must have a definite form, a definite succession of sounds, a definite word to express each object.  The objects have qualities, therefore our language must contain adjectives expressing these qualities.  The qualities of objects are fundamental or relative; express what they are, what they possess, and what they become.

Passing now to singing and music, it happened very luckily for me that just at this time Naegeli and Pfeifer brought out their “Treatise on the Construction of a Musical Course according to the Principles of Pestalozzi.”  Naegeli’s knowledge of music generally, and especially of church music, made a powerful impression upon me, and brought music and singing before me as a means for human culture; setting the cultivation of music, and especially of singing, in a higher light than I had ever conceived possible.  Naegeli was very capable in teaching music and singing, and in representing their function as inspiring aids to pure human life; and although nearly twenty years have elapsed since I heard those lessons of his, the fire of the love for music which they kindled burns yet, active for good, within my breast.  And further, I was taught and convinced by these two super-excellent