In writing a text-book for children, comprising elementary knowledge of everything that ought to be known, Basedow took as his model Comenius’s “Orbis Pictus.” His didactics of language owes much to Comenius as well as to Locke. And in “The Book of Methods for Fathers and Mothers of Families and for the People” he foreshadows Pestalozzi. He believed with Comenius that the remedy for a large part of educational evils lies in “good teachers and good books.” So, besides the text-books, there should be an abundance of supplementary reading for the children and reference books for the teacher; school libraries should be established for the use of both. Institutions should be established for the professional training of teachers, with the model schools attached. In fact, the _Philanthropium_ made the beginning of the normal school in its modern sense, and the flourishing age of juvenile literature came as the result of Basedow’s teachings. The natural development of the child into an ideal citizen, through a free life of frolic and unrestrained pleasurable learning and occupations, was the central idea of Basedowean education. Rousseau’s motto, “The child for the child,” was not well understood by him or did not appeal to him. The chief inspiration he drew from the French Romanticist was the principle, “the child as the child.” And the child, in his understanding, was essentially a gayety-seeking, pleasure-seeking, noisy, restless creature. “Children are fond of movement and noise” (7: p. 23). This was the major premise of his didactic. But utility was another central principle which he shared with all French and English empiricists. And his conception of utility was more like Locke’s than Rousseau’s, namely, that viewed from the standpoint of society and the adult life. The child ought to learn everything useful for becoming an efficient, patriotic member of society--those things alone which are useful. This is the minor premise of his didactic. Now, what conclusions can he draw from these two premises? How a child could be built up to the requirements of adult life without acting against his child nature, how he could be taught everything necessary to make a useful citizen without restraining his playful instincts, this was the problem he tried to solve in his philanthropic institute. The invention of many devices and schemes--all manner of educational machinery was the result. And though he often carried things too far and left several trivial contrivances which have made him a laughing-stock of contemporary and subsequent critics, yet his historic merit as an ingenious inventor of many useful and commendable methods, systems, and plans is certainly undeniable. Moreover, by this ingenuity he exemplified how Lockean and Rousseauean ideals could be made practicable, and how they could be introduced systematically into group education. With all his shortcomings he is entitled to be numbered among the most influential educational