§ 43. In this matter Rollin was more truly the disciple of the Port-Royalists than of Quintilian. They it was who protested against the dismal “grind” of learning to read first in an unknown tongue, and of studying the rules of Latin in Latin with no knowledge of Latin, a course which professed to lead, as Sainte-Beuve puts it, “to the unknown through the unintelligible.” They directed their highly-trained intellects to the teaching of the elements, and succeeded in proving that the ordinary difficulties were due not to the dulness of the learners, but to the stupidity of the masters. They showed how much might be done to remove these difficulties by following not routine but the dictates of thought, and study and love of the little ones. There is an excellent though condensed account of the Port-Royalists under “Jansenists” in Sonnenschein’s _Cyclopædia of Education_. In vol. ij, of Charles Beard’s Port-Royal, (2 vols., 1861) there is a chapter on the Little Schools. The most pleasing account I have seen in English of the Port-Royalists (without reference to education) is in Sir Jas. Stephen’s _Essays on Ecclesiastical Biography_. In French the great work on the subject is Sainte-Beuve’s _Port-Royal_, 5 vols. (71 ed., 6 vols.) The account of the Schools is in 4th bk., in vol. iij, of 1st ed. Very useful for studying the pedagogy of Port-Royal are _L’Education à Port-Royal_ by Félix Cadet (Hachette, 1887) and _Les Pédagogues de Port-Royal_, by I. Carré (Delagrave, 1887). These last give extracts from the main writings on education by Arnauld, Nicole, Lancelot, Coustel, &c. The article, _Port-Royal_, in Buisson’s _D._, is the “Introduction” to Carré’s book. A 3-vol. ed. of Rollin’s _Traité_ was published (Paris, Didot) in 1872. The more interesting parts of this book are contained in F. Cadet’s _Rollin: Traité des Études_ (Delagrave, 1882). Rollin’s work was at one time well-known in the English trans., and copies of it are often to be found “second-hand.” The best part comes last; which may account for the neglect into which the book has fallen. The accounts of Port-Royal and of Rollin in G. Compayré’s _Histoire Critique_ are very good parts of a very good book. Vérin’s _Étude sur Lancelot_ I have not seen, and it is only too probable that I have not given to Lancelot the attention due to him. XII. SOME ENGLISH WRITERS BEFORE LOCKE.