the office of the Queen's
private tutor. Poverty and "household griefs" still gave him anxiety;
but during the five years which elapsed between 1563 and his death in
1568, he found some comfort in the composition of his Schoolmaster,
which was published by his widow in 1570. It was suggested by a
conversation at Windsor with Sir William Cecil, on the proper method of
bringing up children. Sir Richard Sackville was so well pleased with
Ascham's theories that he, with others, entreated him to write a
practical work on the subject. 'The Schoolmaster' argues in favor of
gentleness rather than force on the part of an instructor. Then he
commends his own method of teaching Latin by double translation, offers
remarks on Latin prosody, and touches on other pedagogic themes. Both
this and the 'Toxophilus' show a pure, straightforward, easy style.
Contemporary testimony to its beauty may be found in an appendix to
Mayor's edition of 'The School master' (1863); though Dr. Johnson, in a
memoir prefixed to Rennet's collected edition of Ascham's English works
(1771), says that "he was scarcely known as an author in his own
language till Mr. Upton published his 'Schoolmaster' in 1771." He has
remained, however, the best known type of a great teacher in the
popular memory; in part, perhaps, through his great pupil.

The best collected edition of his works, including his Latin letters,
was published by Dr. Giles in 1864-5. There is an authoritative edition
of the 'Schoolmaster' in the Arber Series of old English reprints. The
best account of his system of education is in R.H. Quick's 'Essays on
Educational Reformers' (1868).

ON GENTLENESS IN EDUCATION

From 'The Schoolmaster'

Yet some will say that children, of nature, love pastime, and mislike
learning; because, in their kind, the one is easy and pleasant, the
other hard and wearisome. Which is an opinion not so true as some men
ween. For the matter lieth not so much in the disposition of them that
be young, as in the order and manner of bringing up by them that be old;
nor yet in the difference of learning and pastime. For, beat a child if
he dance not well, and cherish him though he learn not well, you shall
have him unwilling to go to dance, and glad to go to his book; knock him
always when he draweth his shaft ill, and favor him again though he
fault at his book, you shall have him very loth to be in the field, and
very willing to be in the school. Yea, I say more, and