Although learning was a matter of secondary importance in Locke’s plan for the education of a “young gentleman,” the curriculum he proposed was as rich as that of Comenius, and the practical suggestions he gives as to the teaching of each subject are of much worth. The subject-matter comprises: reading, writing, drawing, shorthand, French, Latin, geography, arithmetic, chronology, history, geometry, astronomy, anatomy, ethics, law, English grammar, rhetoric taught in a practical way, letter-writing, natural philosophy containing biblical history, and physics. Gardening, carpentry, turning, varnishing, graving, metal and jeweler’s work, and other manual occupations are recommended as healthful diversions. Bookkeeping also makes a part of a gentleman’s useful accomplishments. He recommends dancing and wrestling, but depreciates music, painting, fencing, and riding, from one reason or another. The main difference between Locke and Comenius lies in that, while one considers knowledge and information in themselves of great value, as deserving the dignity of man, the other values these rather for their influence on the efficiency and happiness of actual life. Comenius is often called the father of realistic pedagogy, but in my opinion his ideals of education and curriculum are still largely humanistic and even scholastic. It is in Locke that we see the complete victory of realism. Bacon’s influence upon Comenius was mainly in his ideal of universal knowledge. But the real spirit of the new scientific learning found its true supporter in Locke. Comenius drew his philosophical arguments for education from the Bible and from the analogy of Nature. But by Locke pedagogy was put upon a scientific basis--namely, physiology and psychology. At the opening of the chapter, I contrasted Locke as the pedagogue of private education with Comenius as that of public education. Comenius aimed at the enlightenment of the masses, so the machinery of school was necessarily of high importance; hence the dictum: “Good teacher, good books, good method.” Locke, on the other hand, had in view the perfect bringing up of an individual; consequently, a good home with a good tutor was naturally esteemed above everything else. The advantage of group education lies, according to him, in that it will make a boy “bolder, and better able to bustle and shift among boys of his own age; and the emulation of school-fellows often puts life and industry into young lads” (7: p. 46). And the main disadvantage of home education lies in that it makes a youth more ignorant of the world; “wanting there change of company, and being used constantly to the same faces, he will, when he comes abroad, be a sheepish or conceited creature” (7: p. 46). But these shortcomings can be remedied by providing him good company at home and by later traveling. As for the inculcation of virtues and manners, home is decidedly the better place.